Politics
Senate Dismisses Sexual Harassment Petition Against Akpabio, Labels It ‘Dead on Arrival’ Amid Growing Controversy
Senate Dismisses Sexual Harassment Petition Against Akpabio, Labels It ‘Dead on Arrival’ Amid Growing Controversy
The Nigerian Senate has dismissed the sexual harassment petition filed by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan against Senate President Godswill Akpabio, citing procedural violations and declaring it ‘dead on arrival.’ The decision came amid a heated exchange in the red chamber, with legal and ethical debates dominating the plenary session. However, the dismissal has sparked nationwide outrage, with activists and political observers questioning the Senate’s commitment to addressing gender-based allegations.
Background of the Allegations
Akpoti-Uduaghan, a senator representing Kogi Central, had accused Akpabio of making inappropriate advances toward her during a visit to his residence in Akwa Ibom State on December 8, 2023. She claimed that Akpabio held her hand, led her around his house, and propositioned her while her husband trailed behind them. Furthermore, she alleged that the Senate President suggested that she should “make him happy” if she wanted her motions to receive favorable consideration on the Senate floor.
These allegations surfaced shortly after the Senate referred Akpoti-Uduaghan to the Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions for protesting a new seating arrangement in the chamber. Critics argue that the swift dismissal of her petition is an attempt to silence her voice and discredit her claims.
Akpabio Denies Allegations, Senate Rules Violation Cited
During the plenary session, Akpabio categorically denied the accusations, emphasizing his respect for women. He stated:
“I have the highest regard for women. At no time did I ever attempt any form of sexual harassment. Even as a state governor, I was awarded various honors, including ‘The Most Gender-Friendly Governor’ in Nigeria.”
Supporting Akpabio, Senate Chief Whip Mohammed Monguno cited Senate Standing Rules, emphasizing that a petition can only be presented by a senator other than the petitioner. Rule 40(4) explicitly states that “no senator may present to the Senate a petition signed by himself.”
Senate Majority Leader Opeyemi Bamidele warned that entertaining the petition would set a dangerous precedent. However, human rights organizations argue that procedural technicalities should not overshadow the gravity of the allegations, especially in a society where victims of sexual misconduct often struggle to have their voices heard.
Senate Ethics Committee Dismisses Petition Amid Public Outcry
Following the debate, the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, chaired by Senator Neda Imasuen, officially dismissed the petition. Imasuen argued that the issue was already before the courts and, as per Senate tradition, could not be deliberated upon by the committee.
“The first thing we ask when a petition comes before us is whether or not the matter is already in court. If the answer is yes, we do not entertain such petitions. Furthermore, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan signed her own petition, which violates Senate rules,” Imasuen stated.
Akpoti-Uduaghan was notably absent from the committee hearing, which the chairman attributed to possible legal counsel. However, her supporters claim she was deliberately sidelined in a bid to suppress her allegations.
Judiciary Intervenes, Protesters Demand Akpabio’s Resignation
In a related development, the Federal High Court in Abuja issued a 72-hour ultimatum to the National Assembly to justify why the Senate should not be restrained from disciplining Akpoti-Uduaghan over the alleged misconduct. Justice Obiora Egwuatu granted an interim injunction preventing the Senate from taking disciplinary action until the court reviews the matter.
Meanwhile, mass protests erupted across Abuja, Lagos, and other cities, as activists and concerned citizens condemned the Senate’s decision. Protesters marched to the National Assembly, calling for Akpabio’s resignation. Carrying placards reading, “Justice for Natasha” and “Say No to Sexual Harassment in Government”, the demonstrators were blocked from entering the Senate complex by security personnel.
Conversely, a group known as the Kogi Central Concerned Stakeholders dissociated itself from Akpoti-Uduaghan’s claims, condemning what they termed “unnecessary escalation.” In a letter signed by Convener Abdulraheem Adeku, they criticized the senator’s approach, stating:
“A simple compliance issue with Senate rules has degenerated into a vicious attack on the Senate President. Such personal grievances should not undermine the integrity of the National Assembly.”
Calls for an Independent Investigation Grow
Amid rising tensions, women’s rights organizations, legal experts, and opposition politicians have called for an independent investigation into Akpoti-Uduaghan’s allegations. They argue that dismissing the case on procedural grounds sends a dangerous message about the treatment of harassment claims in Nigeria’s political space.
Renowned human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), urged the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and other legal bodies to intervene.
“This case goes beyond legislative rules; it speaks to the culture of impunity in our governance system. An independent panel should be set up to investigate the matter fairly and transparently.”
Next Steps and Legal Implications
With the dismissal of the petition, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal battle now hinges on the judiciary’s intervention. The court has instructed the National Assembly to respond within 72 hours, setting the stage for further legal confrontations. Meanwhile, civil society organizations are mobilizing to ensure the case remains in the public eye, vowing to continue protests until a proper investigation is conducted.
The unfolding controversy continues to grip the nation, sparking debates on power dynamics, gender issues, and parliamentary decorum within Nigeria’s legislative system. Whether this case will lead to meaningful policy changes or be buried in bureaucratic and political maneuvering remains to be seen.
Politics
Kogi’s Quiet Shift: Reviewing Governor Ododo’s First 24 Months in Office
Kogi’s Quiet Shift: Reviewing Governor Ododo’s First 24 Months in Office
By Rowland Olonishuwa
On Tuesday, Kogi State paused to mark two years since Alhaji Ahmed Usman Ododo took the oath as Executive Governor. Across government circles, community halls, and everyday conversations, the anniversary was more than a date on the calendar; it was a milestone that invites both reflection and renewed optimism. A moment to look back at how far the state has travelled in just twenty-four months, and where it is heading next.
Since assuming office in January 2024, Ododo has steered the state through a period of measured consolidation, delivering strategic interventions across security, infrastructure, human capital, and economic revitalisation that are beginning to translate into real improvements for residents.
Governor Ododo stepped into office at a time when expectations were high, and confidence in public institutions needed rebuilding.
His response to these was not loud declarations, but steady consolidation, strengthening structures, restoring order in governance, and setting a clear direction. Over time, that calm approach has become his signature: leadership that listens first, plans carefully, and moves with purpose.
Security has remained the most urgent concern for Nigerians, and Kogi residents are no exceptions; the Ododo-led administration has treated it as such. From deploying surveillance drones to support intelligence operations to recruiting and integrating local hunters and vigilante personnel into formal security frameworks, the government has built a layered safety net.
For farmers returning to their fields, travellers moving along highways, and families in rural communities, the impact is simple and deeply personal: fewer fears, quicker response, and growing confidence that the government is present and concerned about the ordinary people.
Infrastructural development has followed the same practical logic. Roads have been rehabilitated, easing movement for traders and commuters. Budget priorities have shifted toward capital projects and human development, while revived facilities like the Confluence Rice Mill now provide farmers with real economic opportunity. For many households, this means better income prospects, stronger local trade, and renewed belief that development is no longer a distant promise.
Health and education are not left out; the Ododo-led administration has expanded free healthcare services and supported students through examination funding and institutional improvements.
Parents who once struggled with medical bills and school fees have felt relief. Young people preparing for their futures now see government investment not as abstract policy but as something that touches their daily lives.
Governance reforms, from civil service strengthening to new legislative frameworks, have quietly improved how government functions. Salaries are more predictable, public offices are more responsive, and local government structures are more coordinated. These may not always make headlines, but they shape how citizens experience leadership every day.
As the second year anniversary celebrations fade into routine today and Governor Ododo enters his third year in office, the true meaning of the anniversary will continue to linger on.
Two years may not have solved every challenge in the Confluence State -no government ever does, by the way- but they have set a tone of stability, responsiveness, and direction. The next phase will demand deeper impact, broader reach, and sustained security gains.
But for many in Kogi State, the story of the past twenty-four months is already clear: steady hands on the wheel, and a journey that is firmly underway.
Olonishuwa is the Editor-in-Chief of Newshubmag.com. He writes from Ilorin
Politics
Lagos Assembly Debunks Abuja House Rumour, Warns Against Election Season Propaganda
Lagos Assembly Debunks Abuja House Rumour, Warns Against Election Season Propaganda
The Lagos State House of Assembly has described as misleading and mischievous the widespread misinformation that it budgeted for the purchase of houses in Abuja for its members in the 2026 Appropriation Law.
This rebuttal is contained in a statement jointly signed by Hon. Stephen Ogundipe, Chairman, House Committee on Information, Strategy, and Security, and Hon. Sa’ad Olumoh, Chairman, House Committee on Economic Planning and Budget.
Describing the report as a deliberate and disturbing falsehood being peddled by patently ignorant people, the statement reads, “There is no provision whatsoever in the 2026 Budget for the purchase of houses in Abuja or anywhere else for members of the Lagos State House of Assembly. The report is a complete fabrication and a product of political mischief intended to misinform the public.
“The Lagos State House of Assembly does not operate in Abuja. Our constitutional responsibilities, constituencies, and legislative duties are entirely within Lagos State. It is, therefore, illogical, irrational, and irresponsible for anyone to suggest that legislators would appropriate public funds for personal housing outside their jurisdiction.”
The statement emphasised that the budget is already in the public domain and accessible for scrutiny by discerning Lagosians and Nigerians alike. It reiterated that the Lagos State Government operates a transparent budget that speaks to the needs of the people and the demands of a megalopolis.
“We view this rumour as part of a wider attempt at election-season propaganda, designed to erode public trust, sow discord, and malign democratic institutions.”
The chairmen further clarified that the 2026 capital expenditure of the House of Assembly is less than 0.04% of the total CAPEX of the state, which clearly demonstrates the culture of prudence, accountability, and fiscal responsibility that guides the legislature. However, they noted, “Historically, the House does not even access up to its approved budget in many fiscal years.”
They stressed that the Assembly remains fully committed to excellence, transparency, good governance, and the collective welfare of the people of Lagos State, in line with the objectives of the 2026 Budget of Shared Prosperity.
“We therefore challenge those behind this harebrained allegation to produce credible evidence or retract their statements forthwith. Failure to do so may attract appropriate legal actions.
“We urge Lagosians and the general public to disregard this baseless rumour and always verify information from official and credible sources.”
Politics
Democracy in the Crosshairs: How Nigeria’s Ruling APC Weaponises Power and Silences Dissent
Democracy in the Crosshairs: How Nigeria’s Ruling APC Weaponises Power and Silences Dissent.
By George Omagbemi Sylvester | Published by saharaweeklyng.com
“Tinubu’s Government, the EFCC and the Strategic Undermining of Opposition Governors”.
In a striking indictment of Nigeria’s current political reality, Governor Seyi Makinde of Oyo State declared that “you cannot speak truth to power in this dispensation”, directly accusing the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu of intolerance for dissent and an erosion of democratic norms.
Makinde’s remarks (made during a public event in Ibadan on January 25, 2026) were more than a local governor’s lament. They crystallised a mounting national frustration: that Nigeria’s political landscape has tilted dangerously toward executive overreach, institutional capture and political engineering.
This narrative is not isolated. Across Nigeria, governors from opposition parties have defected to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in numbers unprecedented in the nation’s democratic history. Critics argue that these defections are not merely voluntary political choices, but part of a strategic pressure campaign leveraging federal power and institutions to fracture opposition influence.
At its centre lies Nigeria’s principal anti-graft agency – the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The EFCC: Anti-Graft Agency or Political Instrument? Founded to combat corruption, the EFCC’s constitutional mandate is to investigate and prosecute financial and economic crimes across public and private sectors. Its legal independence is enshrined in statute and it has historically pursued high-profile cases, including recovery of nearly $500 million in illicit assets in a single year, demonstrating its capacity for tackling corruption.
However, critics now claim that under the Tinubu administration, the EFCC’s prosecutorial power is being perceived (if not deployed) as a political instrument.
Opposition leaders, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and coalition parties such as the African Democratic Congress (ADC), have publicly accused the federal government of using anti-corruption agencies to intimidate opposition figures and governors, effectively pressuring them into aligning with the APC.
In a statement released in December 2025, opposition figures alleged that institutions such as the EFCC, the Nigerian Police and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission were being selectively wielded to weaken political competitors rather than combat financial crime impartially.
This is not merely rhetorical noise. The opposition’s grievances centre on several observable patterns:
Reopened or New Investigations Against Opposition Figures: The ADC pointed to recent abnormal reactivation of long-dormant cases or new inquiries into financial activities involving senior opposition politicians. These, they argue, often arise shortly before critical elections or political realignments.
Alleged Differential Treatment: According to opponents of the current administration, individuals who have defected to the APC appear less likely to face sustained legal scrutiny or prosecution in EFCC proceedings, even in cases of credible allegations of mismanagement.
Timing of Actions: The timing of certain high-profile investigations, emerging ahead of the 2027 general elections, reinforces perceptions that anti-graft measures are tailored to political cycles rather than legal merit.
The EFCC and Presidency have publicly denied these allegations, insisting that the commission operates independently and pursues corruption irrespective of political affiliation and that Nigeria’s democratic freedoms (including party choice and mobility) remain intact.
Yet the perception of bias, once systemic, is hard to erase, especially when political actors deploy powerful state machinery with strategic timing and selective intensity.
Defections and Power Realignment: A Democracy at Risk? Since 2023 and particularly through 2025, a remarkable number of state governors and senior political leaders have crossed over from opposition parties (notably the Peoples Democratic Party – PDP) to the APC. Though defections are normal in Nigeria’s fluid political system, the scale and speed in recent years are historically noteworthy, raising critical questions about underlying incentives.
The SaharaWeeklyNG reported Makinde’s comments within the broader context of a political climate where dissenting voices face greater obstacles than at any time in recent democratic memory.
Governors who remain in opposition find themselves squeezed between growing federal assertiveness and dwindling political capital. Some analysts argue that the combination of federal resource control, political appointments and influence over public agencies exerts tangible pressure on subnational leaders to align with the ruling party for political survival. This dynamic, they contend, undermines competitive party politics and weakens Nigeria’s multiparty democracy.
Speaking Truth to Power: What Makinde’s Critique Exposes. Governor Makinde’s core grievance (that it is increasingly difficult, perhaps perilous, to speak truth to power) resonates widely among civil society actors, political analysts and democratic advocates:
“YOU CANNOT SPEAK TRUTH TO POWER IN THIS DISPENSATION,” Makinde declared, specifically citing the government’s handling of contentious tax reform bills as an example where dissent was neither welcomed nor transparently debated.
Makinde’s critique reflects deeper structural concerns:
Exclusion of Key Stakeholders: Opposition leaders and state executives report being marginalised from meaningful consultation on national policies affecting federal-state relations, revenue sharing and fiscal reforms.
Institutional Intimidation: The perception that state politicians become targets of federal legal scrutiny after taking firm oppositional stances (real or perceived) discourages robust democratic debate.
Erosion of Opposition Space: A symbiotic effect of party defections and institutional pressure is a shrinking viable space for genuine political opposition, weakening checks and balances essential to democratic governance.
A respected political scientist, Dr. Aisha Bello of the University of Lagos, recently argued that “when opposition becomes fraught with state leverage instead of ideological competition, the very foundation of democratic contestation collapses,” adding that “a government that shies away from criticism risks inversion into autocracy.”
Another expert, Prof. Chinedu Eze, former dean of political studies at Ahmadu Bello University, warned that “selective use of anti-corruption agencies as political tools corrodes public trust and ultimately delegates justice into the hands of incumbents rather than independent courts.” These observations echo growing public skepticism.
The Way Forward: Strengthening Democracy and Institutions. Nigeria’s path forward depends on restoring confidence in democratic norms and institutional independence.
Transparent EFCC Processes: Civil society groups and legal scholars are advocating for enhanced transparency in anti-graft investigations, including clear prosecutorial thresholds and independent audits of case initiation and closures.
Judicial Oversight: Strengthening the judiciary’s capacity and independence is critical to ensuring that allegations of political weaponisation do not go unchecked. Courts must remain the ultimate arbiters of evidence and guilt.
Political Reforms: Advocates demand reforms to party financing, federal-state fiscal relations, and consultation mechanisms to reduce incentives for defections driven by federal resource leverage.
Public Engagement: A more informed and engaged civil society, anchored by independent media and civic education, must hold both government and opposition accountable for adherence to democratic principles.
Beyond The Present Moment.
Governor Makinde’s assertion that it is no longer tenable to “speak truth to power” under the current administration reflects unsettling trends in Nigeria’s evolving democratic landscape. While the EFCC and the Presidency maintain that anti-corruption efforts are independent and constitutionally grounded, opposition leaders (backed by political data and patterns of defections) argue that state power is being used to consolidate one-party dominance and undermine political pluralism.
At this critical juncture, Nigeria must choose between entrenching competitive democracy or sliding toward a political monopoly where dissent is subdued, institutions compromised, and power concentrated.
For Nigeria’s democratic ideals to survive (and thrive) its leaders and citizens must ensure that speaking truth to power remains not a perilous act of defiance but an honoured pillar of national life.
-
celebrity radar - gossips6 months agoWhy Babangida’s Hilltop Home Became Nigeria’s Political “Mecca”
-
society6 months agoPower is a Loan, Not a Possession: The Sacred Duty of Planting People
-
Business6 months agoBatsumi Travel CEO Lisa Sebogodi Wins Prestigious Africa Travel 100 Women Award
-
news6 months agoTHE APPOINTMENT OF WASIU AYINDE BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS AN AMBASSADOR SOUNDS EMBARRASSING






