By By Tony Afejuku
SENATORS Natasha, Akpabio
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and Senator Godswill Akpabio
AKPABIO is not wise… Akpabio is not wise… Akpabio is not wise…
Akpabio is not smart… Akpabio is not smart… Akpabio is not smart…
Akpabio is vindictive… Akpabio is vindictive… Akpabio is vindictive…
Akpabio is … Akpabio is… Akpabio is…
Akpabio is not… Akpabio is not… Akpabio is not…
This is some kind of simple poetry uttered by sundry persons as they perceive Senator Godswill Akpabio, the President of the 10th Senate of Nigeria. Since the excellency’s fray or disagreement with Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan entered the public space, I have been speaking in confidence to different folks and fellows from different, or various and varied backgrounds understandably from the South-South geo-political zone. The poetry I have tried to recite above as the opening lines of the column today originated from my conversations with some ordinary Nigerians, as some of us may call them.
I met them, at different times, in beer parlours and mama-put joints. I did not visit those places to booze or to wack. I went there essentially to find out what or all the things or none they knew and know, every single thing or all the things or nearly all the things with some notable or measurable degree of accuracy, at their finger tips about our national politics.
What came to the fore, to my high astonishment, was the Natasha-Akpabio imbroglio, with gripping understanding and reflection. All the quoted lines (and others I am not quoting here) I perceived – and still perceive – upon my own reflection please me as even better than any logic or rule about poetry about His Excellency will or would.
RELATED POST: https://stonixnews.com/akpabio-vs-natasha-all-in-favour-of-self-help-say-aye/
Apparently, His Excellency the Senate President, who wants to luxuriate in his fame as the president of the current senate did not read me last Friday. His wrong advisers and lawyers and acolytes and sycophants and deceivers seemingly did not pay heed to my column as well. Because I did not want to be seen or denounced as a non-neutral in the tragedy that has ensued between two friends in the senate, I tried to sue for truce and peace.
Anything contrary to this would not but be ruinous to the understanding of the hearers and watchers of the Senate proceedings. The purport of my remark is that despite his enormous powers as Senate President, things would not augur well for His Excellency after all that would be said and done. A wise person, no matter how powerful in the office he occupies temporarily or permanently, is not to be obeyed, respected or reverenced more than the truth.
Anyone, any leader, who wants to earn fame in a country, in any country, must know the knowledge or learn the knowledge and truth and its act and art for the sake of the people and the personal fame he must earn well, rightly, correctly and truthfully. I don’t want words to falter on my lips – or on the lips of my pen. I will now let some of my readers and watchers of what has transpired in the Senate and the fall-out from there speak out. I will quote them verbatim.
A female reader who requests to be anonymous:
A few points to note on your column of last Friday… “to find a factual and truthful solution to what is growing to be a pattern of values between the Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Senator (Mrs.) Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan…” Indeed values though abstract are palpable in our words and actions. Last Friday’s article by you, though seemingly placatory, has become talk from the lectern – the preacher or teacher’s both of which you are. Last Friday’s morning, March 7, 2025, the tabloids were awash with news that will not be washed away soon, especially by the torrents of Akpoti-Uduaghan’s intransigence.
She bears the burden of half-year suspension, stopped salary, withdrawn security details and other latent punitive measures. The weights of the chastisement or punishment against her are patriarchal and personal, with undue and untimely use of state or institutional apparatus that can only be mitigated by her apology! No more, no less.
Why was the committee saddled or un-saddled with the investigation not allowed to do its statutory jobs? Whither court orders? Who is afraid of dusty, sneeze-causing matters to be swept out from under the carpets? Is any political officer holder bigger than extant national laws? Let there be fairness and libidinal matters brought to equitable judgment irrespective of whose ox is gored. Nemesis is a goddess!
On a lighter note, my generation of women was weaned on the counsel not to swear to consortium innocence. That is my candid advice. (Is Mrs. Akpabio there? Is she reading this?) The instruction goes further that no female tag was attached to a male phallus on the day of foreskin removal. Therefore, no wife should defend her husband’s sexual fidelity. Period. I recall an article by Funke Egbemode in The Punch on the matter years ago.
This is what another reader (Mr. Joseph Ogbewe) says:
Senator Natasha must not apologise.
All those senators requesting undeserved apology from Natasha for committing no offence are naïve and disgusting to have even conceived that notion. A woman who stands up against oppression and frustration from the Senate Leadership for not yielding to obvious pressure to succumb to amorous relationship should be honoured and not vilified.
Any apology from her will make nonsense of her profound allegation against the Senate President. I see her as the cross-bearer for women’s rights and she must stand resolute in carrying that cross for all oppressed women all over the world. This is my submission.
Another reader, Professor Owojecho Omoha states as follows: A good columnist is a nation speaking to all, no more, no less. This is where South Africa is better. Mandela taught the South African, when and where to resign, if fame goes against infamy’s way. Here we hold to infamy, come what may; after all, we can bribe a whole country to declare the guilty innocent, and the innocent guilty.
How is this situation different from a stolen election? Even a wife publicly declares a husband innocent and privately declares him guilty at bedside. I will be a rebel for a reason: to tell our nation that men whose wives declare innocent are publicly guilty based on facts before us. The face I see here is that of Juliet; a Romeo dies privately. Only in the public denials are dramatized. T. A., you have spoken. Who are there to listen and draft the suspension letter for a Senator, Senators? Not a genuine critic and literary artist like you, T. A., columnist and writer on immortality’s highway. Yes.
To be continued.
Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.
What's your reaction?
