On 16 April, there were reports that Presidential Council (PC) head Muhammed al-Menfi had fired Lieutenant General Salaheddin al-Namroush from his position as West Coast Military District Commander and appointed Major General Ali al-Bannini in his place. Al-Namroush is also the Acting Chief of Staff of the Libyan Army since the death of Muhammed al-Haddad in the Turkish plane crash.
On the same day in the morning, al Menfi and his deputy Abdullah al Lafi, acting as Libya’s Supreme Commander of the Libyan Army, held an expanded military meeting in Tripoli with the General Staff, including al-Namroush, and the heads of branches and operations to review readiness, assess structural and administrative challenges, and reinforce institutional discipline. The session examined the General Staff’s tasks and obstacles, outlined organizational measures to improve combat efficiency and leadership performance, and set strict regulations for military projects and training exercises inside and outside Libya, emphasizing full adherence to legal and military procedures. It also discussed restructuring General Staff units to strengthen centralized command, enhance discipline, and advance the goal of building a unified, professional military institution.
In the early afternoon, a small military convoy of troops affiliated with al-Namroush left Zawiyya heading for Tripoli’s Abu Sitta navy base, where the PC headquarters are based. Their commanders intended to hold a meeting at Abu Sitta to formally oppose decisions issued by the PC in its capacity as Supreme Commander, especially on the appointment of al-Bannini to lead the West Coast Military District. They argued al-Menfi’s move violates military hierarchy and sidelines long standing field commanders.
In the late afternoon, it was rumoured that the issue between al-Menfi and al-Namroush was resolved. A meeting was underway in the Abu Sitta navy base between al-Menfi and leaders from Zawiyya. Other rumours claim that al-Menfi left Abu Sitta just before the meeting should have started, insisting on not backing down from his decision.
The Presidential Council firmly denied reports of any armed movement aimed at attacking its headquarters or threatening its members, dismissing claims of a ‘military rebellion’ in Tripoli as baseless. PC media director Muhammed Bouras al Sharif said there are no security threats to the Council’s leadership, rejecting rumours that armed units were moving along major roads to besiege the headquarters or acting on orders from acting Chief of Staff al-Namroush in response to recent command appointments.
On 18 April, Zawiyya militia leader Muhammed Bahroun aka al-Far denounced the dismissal of al‑Namroush as an attack on the military institution and issued a sharply worded warning to al‑Menfi. In his statement, Bahroun demanded that al‑Menfi immediately reverse the decision, describing it as an unacceptable overreach and threatening consequences if it is not withdrawn.
On 20 April, acting Libyan Army Chief of Staff al-Namroush met in Tripoli with Counter‑Terrorism Force Commander Muhammad al‑Zain to discuss strengthening joint training, coordination, and counter‑terrorism efforts as part of broader plans to improve readiness and professionalize military performance. The meeting focused on raising personnel efficiency through structured training programs that address current security challenges, and it reaffirmed the General Staff’s commitment to unified institutional work and higher standards of discipline across all units.
Libyan Army personnel in the western region issued a forceful statement rejecting the PC’s reported plan to appoint ‘an officer from outside the military institution’ to command the Western Coast Military District. They described the move as a serious breach of military norms and an insult to the chain of command. The statement condemned what it called political favoritism, the appointment of unqualified individuals to sensitive posts, and the practice of assigning multiple leadership roles to the same figures. Army members said these decisions undermine professionalism, damage morale, and erode discipline within the ranks. They warned that such policies risk weakening the military’s cohesion and stability, urging the PC to reverse course immediately to preserve the institution’s integrity and authority.