Opinion
Libel Accusation: Between Ikechukwu Iroha’s smartness and Kenneth Ahia’s brashness
By Michael Nwabueze
As we countdown to the end of the 7 days given to Hon Ikechukwu Iroha by Kenneth Ahia, SAN to retract his essay titled “Payment of legal fees through contract award?” and pay N1bn in damages to compensate for the damages the said article was purported to have done to the reputation of Barr Ahia, let us consider facts of the issue.
In what is supposed to be a pre-action notice titled RE: MALICIOUS AND LIBELOUS PUBLICATION AGAINST KENNETH AHIA, SAN: DEMAND FOR APOLOGY AND DAMAGES OF ONE BILLION NAIRA, sent to (not served on) Ikechukwu Iroha via whatsapp, solicitors to Kenneth Ahia, SAN, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa SAN & Co had claimed among other things that the publication had exposed Kenneth Ahia, SAN “to public ridicule, opprobrium and odium.”
Let me state categorically clear that unless Kenneth Ahia and his solicitors have other meanings to what makes up a libelous publication aside what is known to Law, their pursuit of a never-coming apology and a non-existent N1,000,000.00 (One Billion Naira) is not only a wishful thinking but also a wild goose chase, and the earlier they retract, the more of their energy and resources they will save for themselves.
First, Ikechukwu was intelligent enough to only express his fundamental human right of freedom of expression in that essay in question by making postulations and asking questions. Even the title of the essay does not suggest any malice but a treatise in responsible citizenship seeking answers to issues that could lead to a compromise of government covenant with the people. As a question, the title, “Payment of legal fees through contract award?”, tried to create a basis for discussion and constructive argument for the good of society.
One of the statements highlighted by Kenneth Ahia, SAN in his notice of legal action to Hon. Ikechukwu Iroha says:
“In what seems like an attempt at organized heist, Gov Otti has been caught up in another scandal involving award of road project contracts in Aba…We have just received information that Mr Otti allegedly awarded all or most of these contracts to a company where his election petition tribunal lead counsel, Kenneth Ahia, SAN has major shareholding interest…”
Surely, nothing is libelous in the above statement as words/phrases like “seems”, “just received information” (the source of which the law protects Ikechukwu from not revealing as a public commentator), and “allegedly” all settle the fact that the essay was meant to raise and appraise critical occurrences including relationships between Otti and Ahia that could jeopardise transparent and accountable use of Abia’s resources.
With that, Ikechukwu could not have fallen foul of libel.
The other highlighted statement for which Ahia is threatening Ikechukwu with a libel suit goes thus:
“Are those jobs meant to defray the cost of legal representation at the tribunal as the SAN, who is a major shareholder of Solberg and a major stakeholder of Labour Party is in charge of all the Labour Party’s candidates’ legal matters in Abia?”
This is another fundamental question Ikechukwu asked in public interest, well deserving of answers and not a suit, as the people deserve to know if such relationships are capable of leading to a compromise in the deployment of state resources.
The last of the part of the essay for which Hon Ikechukwu Iroha was threatened with a lawsuit by Kenneth Ahia was the part that states that:
“The most scary implication of the above is that the cost of these jobs will likely be inflated to make up for the cost of these litigations, which is allegedly the main consideration in awarding the fraudulent jobs.”
Again, the above statement was a postulation to create room for further discussion and robust debate in a bid to check any iota of executive recklessness. With words/phrases like “will likely” and “allegedly” used, Ikechukwu’s true intentions of being an unbiased public commentator come to the fore. And rather than be vilified, he should be edified for his courage to speak up at a time it is unfashionable to go against the government of the day.
One of the fundamental defences against libel suit is public interest. Ikechukwu’s essay is self-sufficient in proving that it was written in the interest of the public which the law recognizes as “comments on public policies, matters of public interest, or executive decisions not constituting sedition, incitement or treason.” The content of that essay raised pertinent questions deserving closer scrutiny to ensure that our commonwealth is not shared among a circle of friends masquerading as redeemers.
Ikechukwu Iroha owes the public both social and moral duty/responsibility to make known the relationships existing between the governor of Abia State and Kenneth Ahia, SAN to the extent that such a relationship could cause a conflict of interest to the governor thereby causing damage to the sociopolitical and moral fabric of the state, or even cause the state some unnecessary financial losses preventable through such expositions.
It is, therefore, not only disingenuous but a terrible disservice to the state and her people to slam or threaten to slam a libel suit against a man with such a heavy burden of sociopolitical/moral duty to society. Such a threat is meant to gag the citizens and cow them into silence, and it is not going to be accepted. Anyone who does not wish to be scrutinized should keep away from Abia State government because we are more committed to scrutinizing them more than they are committed to browbeating the people into silence.
From the foregoing, that threat of a lawsuit against Hon Ikechukwu Iroha by Kenneth Ahia is patently, latently, and inherently defective. What Ahia has succeeded in achieving by going public with the pre-action notice is a fulfilment of his desire to expose Hon Iroha and his young family to all forms of security threats and breaches by exposing his private residence even up to his flat number. Such notices are by convention private and are only made public if someone is evading service after which alternative means of service can be deployed but only as ordered by a court of competent jurisdiction. At Ahai’s age and stage, and professional experience, one would have thought that he had overgrown such exuberance usually associated with fresh lawyers still learning the basic rudiments of their trade. We hereby wish to put Kenneth Ahia on notice that should anything untoward happen to Hon Ikechukwu Iroha and/or his young family, the world knows where to direct their suspicion and things will not be left lying low.
See you guys in court!
Michael Nwabueze writes from Aba
News
Eleven unassailable achievements of the Akpabio-led Tenth Senate and a historic legacy of purpose
By Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh mnipr
To inquire—often with a faint hint of derision—about the legacy Senator Godswill Akpabio may bequeath as President of Nigeria’s Tenth Senate is to display a troubling indifference to recent legislative history. The record is neither obscure nor equivocal. Under his stewardship, the Senate has passed more than 90 bills, with over 58 already receiving Presidential assent. That is not a statistic easily waved away, even by the most committed cynics. You are invited to verify these figures and raise the alarm if they prove to be anything less than accurate.
If the question arises from ignorance rather than malice, then this serves as an opportune moment to elucidate the record. After all, this record speaks clearly enough for itself, requiring no embellishment; only acknowledgment.
For citizens fatigued by grandstanding and hungry for facts, here are eleven key achievements that withstand serious scrutiny. Taken together, they reveal a Senate not merely passing time in office, but deliberately shaping a consequential and enduring legacy.
1. Refining the Legal Framework Governing Elections
With the recent passage of the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill, 2025, the catalogue of landmark laws passed by the Tenth Senate has once again escalated. This seminal piece of legislation directly addresses critical areas for improvement in Nigeria’s democratic process, introducing provisions that enhance the transparency of result management and the credibility of party primaries. By refining the legal framework governing elections, the Senate has moved beyond reactive patchworks to proactively strengthen the very foundation upon which representative governance rests. It is a declaration that the health of Nigeria’s democracy is a permanent and urgent legislative priority.
As evidenced by that recently amended law, the Tenth Senate has been conspicuously industrious, legislating with intent. Always with an unwavering focus on the intricate machinery of the state.
2. Restoring Budgetary Sanity and Scale
Perhaps the most understated yet consequential achievement of the Akpabio-led Senate is the restoration of fiscal order. By timely passing the 2024 and 2025 budgets and re-establishing Nigeria’s adherence to a January-to-December budget cycle, the Senate has reinstated a foundational discipline of governance. This is not mere clerical neatness; it is an economic signal. Investors plan according to calendars, not excuses. Ministries execute when timelines are predictable. The ₦49.7 trillion 2025 budget, a bold leap in scale, reflects a state that has finally acknowledged the magnitude of its challenges and responded with proportionate ambition. One may debate the figures, but seriousness has returned to the process. It is the sound of a heavy door being firmly shut on an era of chronic postponement.
3. Ministerial Screenings with Teeth
Gone are the days when ministerial confirmations resembled ceremonial nods, rituals of handshakes and rehearsed platitudes. Under this Senate, screenings have transformed into substantive engagements. Nominees are rigorously questioned on their vision, coherence, and the intricate mechanics of delivery. Policy literacy has become paramount. Track records are scrutinized, not merely recounted. The message is straightforward and long overdue: holding an office is not synonymous with understanding it. From the outset, the Senate has asserted that executive authority must be accompanied by intellectual heft, not merely political credentials.
4. Legislating for a Modern Economy
To be unequivocally clear, the Tenth Senate has exhibited a refreshing zeal for structural reform. The Electricity Act Amendment, which enhances decentralization in power generation and distribution, directly addresses one of Nigeria’s most obstinate growth constraints. Alongside it are the Nigeria Tax Act and the Data Protection Act, measures that modernize fiscal administration and safeguard the digital economy. These are not ostentatious laws; they are load-bearing beams for a twenty-first-century economy striving to transcend oil dependency, improvisation, and the dense administrative fog that has long impeded progress.
5. A Proactive Security Posture
Security has not merely been treated as a rhetorical device but as a legislative obligation. Through focused committee work, national security dialogues, and laws such as the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons Act, the Senate has targeted the supply lines of insecurity. The Defence Industries Corporation Modernisation Act signifies a deeper shift: a transition from perpetual dependence to long-term self-reliance. It represents the distinction between reacting to threats and cultivating the capacity to deter them. A subtle yet vital recalibration.
6. Embracing the Constitutional Moment
If history proves benevolent, the ongoing constitutional review process may define this Senate more profoundly than any single bill. By reopening fundamental discussions on state policing, fiscal federalism, and local government autonomy, the legislature has chosen arduous work over comfortable evasions. These are not mere academic exercises; they are the unresolved dilemmas at the heart of Nigeria’s chronic instability. To engage them earnestly is to accept that nation-building is often profoundly uncomfortable before it becomes rewarding.
7. Institutionalising the Anti-Corruption Fight
This Senate appears to grasp, instinctively, that corruption is not vanquished by outrage but by design. By fortifying legal frameworks through reforms such as the Fiscal Responsibility and Transparency Act and the Police Professionalism and Accountability Act, it has concentrated on systems rather than slogans. The objective is unglamorous yet effective: to embed integrity into procurement, budgeting, and law enforcement itself, thereby depriving corruption of its hiding places.
8. Fiscal Stewardship in an Age of Debt
Borrowing requests have proliferated. The Senate’s response has been neither blind obstruction nor rubber-stamp approval. Instead, it has exercised scrutiny, conditionality, and a persistent demand for value. This is the delicate art of co-governance: supporting the executive when warranted, pushing back when prudent, and repeatedly posing the often-unfashionable question of sustainability. It is not dramatic work; it is the patient, responsible labor of trusteeship.
9. Legislating for the Human Dimension
Amid grand macroeconomic recalibration, the Senate has maintained a focus on the citizenry. The Student Loans Act expands access to higher education at a time when household incomes are under severe strain. The National Minimum Wage Increase Act is a direct legislative acknowledgment of the dignity of labor in an inflation-ravaged economy. These are not silver bullets; however, they represent deliberate attempts to soften the sharpest edges of hardship and to invest in people, still Nigeria’s most abundant and renewable resource.
10. Infrastructure as a Legislative Priority
By prioritizing approvals, oversight, and enabling legislation for major infrastructure projects, particularly in power and defense, the Senate has regarded infrastructure not as executive indulgence but as a national imperative. Roads, energy grids, and security assets do not merely consume budgets; they generate employment, unlock productivity, and stabilize communities. The Senate’s role in facilitating these pathways is not peripheral; it is central.
11. The Quiet Power of Stable Leadership
Perhaps the most underrated achievement is the institutional stability itself. Akpabio’s instinct for realpolitik, coupled with his understanding of the intricate calculus of regional and political balance, has fostered a chamber that debates, negotiates, and ultimately functions. In a political climate where friction frequently devolves into paralysis, this relative consensus has served as the essential lubricant in the engine. It may not be glamorous, but it is, quite simply, indispensable.
A Legacy Forged in the Work of the Possible.
Senator Godswill Akpabio is not given to lyricism about politics. He is, rather, a consolidator—an institutional mechanic with a reformer’s appetite—who understands that in a sprawling and argumentative democracy such as Nigeria, progress is rarely the offspring of moral exhibitionism. It is more often the product of negotiation, arithmetic, persuasion, and, when necessary, unsentimental compromise. Purists, who prefer the hygiene of opposition to the burdens of responsibility, may call this duplicity. Those acquainted with governance call it reality.
The distance between statute books and village squares remains stubbornly wide. Hunger has not been legislated out of existence. Insecurity has not been adjourned sine die. The proof of any Senate’s seriousness lies not in the eloquence of its debates but in the execution of its enactments—in whether ink becomes infrastructure, whether clauses become commerce, whether appropriations become actualities. Dismissing this Senate as irrelevant, however, requires ignoring the instruments it has deliberately fashioned and set within reach. Laws do not implement themselves; they require administrative will and bureaucratic competence across the vast machinery of the state.
What the Tenth Senate, under Akpabio, has supplied—swiftly and with focus—is architecture. At a time when institutional paralysis is too often mistaken for normalcy, it has chosen to function. That decision, prosaic though it may sound, is no small achievement in a political culture where dysfunction can masquerade as authenticity.
As 2027 approaches, bringing with it the predictable turbulence of democratic contestation, the Akpabio-led Senate deserves assessment by the cold metrics of substance rather than the warm currents of sentiment. Nations are not constructed by vibes, nor sustained by viral indignation. They are built incrementally—by statutes, by procedures, by institutions that confront disorder and, stubbornly, insist on operating. In an era when Nigeria has too frequently flirted with drift, the deliberate choice to govern—to keep the constitutional machinery moving—may prove to be not merely a legacy, but the indispensable precondition for any legacy at all.
•Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh mnipr, is the Special Adviser on Media/Publicity and official Spokesperson to the President of the Senate
By Ken Harries Esq
There’s a trend in Nigeria where accusations are louder than the coin box, and everyone scrambles to the high ground of moral outrage. Yet, here comes Senator Godswill Akpabio, the President of the 10th Senate, going against the trend like a devoted monk who has decided that the usual script of lawsuits, vendettas, and endless bitterness won’t augur well.
In our clime, these spectacles are enough to fill a library. This stands out like the script for one of the best sellers.
A wild and unsubstantiated allegation of murder and organ harvesting levied on Akpabio, which occasioned investigations, courtrooms, and quite unexpectedly, forgiveness.
In a land where politicians hold on to grudges tighter than their lust for power, Akpabio chose grace. Amazing! Could this be a sign that even in our polarised landscape, truth and reconciliation might yet have a fighting chance?
● *The weird allegation*
Scandal usually starts small and balloons into monstrous dimensions that devour reputations and leave a foul stench on the victim.
In this case, it was the telephone conversation between Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and Sandra Duru, a US-based activist, that leaked — naturally, because what good is a juicy gist if it stays private?
The claims were as shocking as they were grave: that Akpabio and his wife had a hand in the 2021 murder of Iniobong Umoren, a young job-seeker from Akwa Ibom State. Not just murder, but with the twisted tale that Umoren’s organs were harvested to treat the wife’s illness.
One marvels at how such tales gain legs in Nigerian politics. It is as if we have all signed up for a perpetual drama series, complete with villains, victims, and plot twists. These were accusations that could ruin lives, hurled into the public space without a shred of evidence.
In a country where political rivals sharpen knives at every turn, this one went deep, painting Senator Akpabio as some sort of macabre mastermind.
● *The Facts of the matter*
On April 2, 2025, Sandra Duru wrote a formal petition to the Inspector General of Police, demanding investigation into the leaked conversation between her and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. The petition was assigned to the Police Monitoring Unit. The investigation took the police team to Akwa Ibom State for a thorough assignment. They pored over certified court records, the post-mortem report, and also interviewed the family members of the late Iniobong Umoren who had witnessed the autopsy. What emerged was a picture as clear as day, though not what the accusers were expecting.
Back in April 2021, the youthful Iniobong Umoren met a tragic end at the hands of Uduak Frank Akpan, who lured her with a fake job offer, sexually assaulted, and murdered her. Akpan was tried in the Akwa Ibom State High Court, convicted, and sentenced to death.
• *Any post-mortem?*
It was confirmed no organs were missing; everything was intact, as attested to by Umoren’s sister – Ifiok Umoren, who stood there during medical procedure. “No organs were removed,” Ifiok Umoren said plainly, putting paid to the offensive rumour.
• *Any link to Akpabio?* None whatsoever. Something must have plucked from the imagination of the purveyor of this indiscretion – who is a known content creator and also given to mischief and lawlessness. The Akwa Ibom State Director of Public Prosecution – Mr Friday Johnson Itim, laid it out: the crime was a lone wolf act, no connections to high places. The allegation was “false and without any iota of truth,” as the police report declared.
• *Any deepfakes?*
The forensic audio analysis contrary to Senator Natasha’s denial, confirmed the recording was the real voice communication between Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and Sandra Duru who were both brought together by one Ina Okopi Agu, not AI generated or deepfake. So, there you have it: a baseless storm in a teacup, debunked by cold and hard facts. One cannot help but wonder why such fictions take root so easily in our soil. Is it the thrill of taking down a highly-placed individual? Or is it a national pastime to murmur and spread rumours without demanding evidence?
● *The legal aftermath*
With the truth laid bare, the legal wheels began to turn in earnest. On March 29, 2025, the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation slammed charges of criminal defamation on Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, zeroing in on that organ-harvesting imputation. Akpabio, no stranger to the rough and tumble of politics, initially went on the offensive, filing many defamation suits against various individuals, including the aforementioned Senator. One could hardly blame him; in the arena of high stakes politics, you fight fire with fire or risk getting scorched.
Regardless, the tale twists away from the predictable. Instead of dragging this out into an endless courtroom saga, Akpabio paused. As discerning readers know, many of these courtroom battles often end in mutual exhaustion, with no winners save the lawyers. Yet Akpabio’s move hinted at something deeper, a willingness to step back from the brink.
● *A gesture of Forgiveness or Foolishness?*
And then came the pivotal moment, as if scripted by a higher power of providence. It was during the New Year Mass at Sacred Heart Parish in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, early in January 2026. The priest preached on forgiveness, that age-old virtue we all nod at but seldom practice.
The Senate President later reflected that the sermon felt aimed straight at him, a divine nudge in the ribs. “It was as if the priest was speaking directly to me,” he said, realising the weight of carrying grudges into a new year.
Inspired by faith, Senator Godswill Akpabio directed his legal team to withdraw all pending lawsuits in every court. No fanfare, no conditions; just a clean slate. The notice of discontinuance was filed, and on January 15, 2026, the Federal Capital Territory High Court struck out the charges against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
In Nigerian politics, where forgiveness is as common as snow in the Sahara, this was nothing short of extraordinary. One must show respect to whom it is due. It is so easy to talk about grace, but to actually demonstrate it? That is the trademark of legends.
● *A Word to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan*
As we celebrate this uncommon act of grace, a word of caution becomes necessary for the beneficiary thereof. Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan would do well to recognise that she has been shown a level of magnanimity rarely seen in our clime. She now stands at a crossroad where the path she chooses will define not just her immediate political future but her legacy. To continue to travel on this ignominious path with tar brush and theatrical indignation, having been handed an exit from a well-deserved legal ordeal, would be the height of political folly. The public is watching; history is recording. The wise course now is to accept the olive branch, reflect deeply on the gravity of her invidious umbrage and conduct herself with the maturity that her office demands. Grace, after all, is not a licence to repeat old mistakes but an invitation to embrace a new, better and purposeful path.
● *Public reaction*
The public, like a jubilation in a rapture, responded with a wave of overwhelming support for Senator Akpabio. A coalition of civil society groups under the aegis of Human Rights Africa led the applause, hailing and praising Akpabio’s act as an “exemplary display of maturity, tolerance and magnanimity.” They were never wrong; in a time of division, this gesture spoke volumes about the Senate President’s demonstrated commitment to the ideals of our social democracy, the rule of law, peaceful co-existence, national cohesion and institutional integrity.
● *The enduring lessons*
How did such a baseless allegation gain such massive traction? Sandra Duru still calls for accountability, insisting the matter is not buried. Fair play to her; voices like that keep the powerful on their toes. But for Akpabio, the chapter is closed, with a focus on forgiveness over vengeance.
• *The wider implications*
In an age of instant judgements and viral claims, Akpabio’s actions demonstrate leadership that rises above the fray. It is a lesson in how truth prevails, grace bridges divides, and reconciliation can heal what division tears apart.
Those who have studied the growth of other nations understand that to get things done in this country, a touch of radical idealism is needed.
• *Akpabio’s path of grace?*
That is idealism in action, pursued not with ruthlessness but with the softened heart of a grace carrier and a man who knows his priest is a human vessel bearing a divine message.
As we murmur and grumble our way forward, we should all pause and reflect. In Nigeria, where nice guys often finish last, Senate President Godswill Akpabio shows that grace doesn’t mean weakness. Forgiveness doesn’t mean foolishness. It means strength. And in our polarised landscape, that is an honourable path, a path worth following. To forgive is never foolishness but it is divine.
• Ken Harries Esq is an Abuja-based development communication specialist.
By Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh mnipr
In the evolving story of Nigeria’s democratic consolidation, few issues have provoked as much intensity as electoral reform. The signing into law of the Electoral Act (Repeal and Re-enactment) Bill 2026 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu marked another chapter in this journey, drawing applause, skepticism, and fierce debate in equal measure.
At the centre of this moment stands Godswill Akpabio, President of the Senate, who has consistently articulated a position that blends institutional caution with reformist intent. His assertion that the National Assembly met “the aspirations of Nigerians, not a few people who make noise” reflects not merely rhetorical flourish, but a deeper philosophy of lawmaking anchored in constitutionalism, legislative procedure, and national peculiarities.
To understand Akpabio’s positioning, one must situate the reform within Nigeria’s broader democratic trajectory. Since the country’s return to civilian rule in 1999, electoral reforms have often oscillated between technological optimism and structural reality. The 2026 re-enactment does not discard innovation; rather, it recalibrates it. In defending the new Act, Akpabio emphasized that the National Assembly undertook a “painstaking” and “thorough” process, mindful of the country’s infrastructural limitations, judicial precedents, and the ultimate objective of preventing disenfranchisement.
A key flashpoint in the debate was the question of electronic transmission of results. For many reform advocates, real-time electronic transmission became symbolic of transparency. Yet Akpabio’s argument was not against technology; it was against rigidity detached from capacity. He consistently maintained that technology must serve democracy, not endanger it. In a country where broadband penetration is uneven, where insecurity disrupts network infrastructure across multiple states, and where power supply remains inconsistent, embedding inflexible “real-time” mandates into statute could, in his view, expose elections to avoidable litigations and invalidation.
This perspective aligns with the constitutional role of the legislature. The Senate does not conduct elections; it makes laws. The responsibility for operational modalities rests with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which applies the law within its administrative and technical capacity. By leaving room for INEC to determine timing and modalities of transmission, the Act reflects a respect for institutional boundaries. Akpabio’s defense of this approach underscores his insistence that Parliament legislate for posterity, not for transient political advantage.
At the State House signing ceremony, President Tinubu reinforced this institutional clarity. He observed that Nigeria’s elections remain “essentially manual.” Ballots are cast manually, counted manually, and declared by human beings. While electronic viewing enhances transparency, the core process remains human-centered. Tinubu’s caution about broadband readiness and cyber vulnerabilities echoes Akpabio’s reasoning. Together, their statements project a governance philosophy that privileges clarity and feasibility over performative reform.
Perhaps the most celebrated innovation in the new Act is the formal legal recognition of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) result viewer, commonly referred to as IReV. This recognition represents a significant milestone. For the first time since independence in 1960, electronic viewing of polling unit results is explicitly grounded in statutory authority. Under the amended framework, results transmitted electronically—even if delayed due to connectivity issues—must ultimately reflect on the IReV portal once network is restored. This creates a verifiable digital trail that citizens, observers, and parties can scrutinize and interrogate.
Akpabio described this as a landmark safeguard against a historic problem: tampering between polling units and collation centres. By ensuring that Form EC8A—the primary polling unit result form signed by presiding officers and party agents—feeds into a publicly accessible portal, the law strengthens accountability without discarding manual collation procedures validated by courts.
The Supreme Court’s pronouncements in post-2023 election litigation had clarified that IReV, as previously configured, was not the definitive legal record of results. Rather than ignore this judicial interpretation, the legislature responded by integrating electronic viewing into statutory text while preserving the evidentiary primacy of signed result forms. This harmonization of law and jurisprudence illustrates legislative maturity.
Critics, including the opposition parties, alleged that the Act’s signing reflected partisan fear. Civil society voices such as Yiaga Africa described the reform as incremental where transformation was needed. Yet even among critics, a pragmatic thread emerged.
The Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre and the Transition Monitoring Group urged acceptance of the law while focusing attention on demanding credible conduct from INEC. This convergence suggests that while disagreements persist about optimal reform design, there is recognition that institutional strengthening is iterative.
Akpabio’s stance during earlier debates further illuminates his approach. On February 8, at a public presentation of Senator Effiong Bob’s book in Abuja, he cautioned against hasty conclusions about an amendment process still underway. His insistence that commentators wait until Votes and Proceedings were finalized before passing judgment reflects a proceduralist ethos.
Legislative drafting is iterative. Clauses are debated, amended, harmonized between chambers, and only then crystallized into final text. By defending this process against what he termed premature media trials, Akpabio positioned himself as a guardian of institutional integrity.
His critique of “retreat politics” is equally telling. Consultative retreats, he argued, are valuable but not binding. Final authority rests on the Senate floor, where clauses are debated and voted upon. This distinction reinforces parliamentary sovereignty within Nigeria’s constitutional framework. It also shows a deeper democratic principle: advocacy informs lawmaking, but elected representatives deliberate and decide.
Another noteworthy provision in the amended Act concerns internal party democracy. By empowering party members to vote directly for candidates during primaries, the law dilutes the dominance of small delegate blocs. In theory, this broadens participation, reduces transactional politics, and enhances legitimacy. Akpabio’s highlighting of this reform signals an understanding that electoral integrity begins within parties, not merely at polling units.
The Act also addresses scenarios where leading candidates are disqualified by courts. By mandating fresh elections in such circumstances, it prevents outcomes where significantly lower-polling candidates assume office by default. This provision closes a loophole that had generated controversy in past cycles. In doing so, the legislature strengthens the moral authority of electoral outcomes.
The reduction of statutory notice for elections from 360 days to 300 days, may appear technical but carries practical implications. It allows scheduling flexibility, including the possibility of avoiding sensitive religious periods such as Ramadan and Lent. This demonstrates legislative sensitivity to socio-cultural realities—a recurring theme in Akpabio’s rhetoric about Nigeria’s peculiarities.
Opposition criticisms deserve engagement. The PDP characterized the signing as hurried and partisan. Yet the legislative timeline reflects deliberation across chambers, conference committee harmonization, and eventual executive assent. Moreover, the principle of the legislative-executive cooperation is intrinsic to constitutional governance. The swift assent by President Tinubu can be interpreted not as haste but as responsiveness to parliamentary consensus.
Support from figures like Nyesom Wike reinforces the perception that the reform commands cross-sectional backing within the governing architecture. Wike’s description of democracy as a “work-in-progress” aligns with Akpabio’s incrementalist philosophy. Reform, in this view, is evolutionary rather than revolutionary.
Central to Akpabio’s defense is the rejection of absolutism. Mandating real-time electronic transmission in a context of infrastructural fragility could render entire states’ results vulnerable to nullification due to network outages. He invoked comparative examples, including electoral disputes in advanced democracies, to illustrate that even technologically sophisticated systems encounter anomalies. The lesson he draws is humility: laws must anticipate worst-case scenarios.
This caution is not synonymous with conservatism. By embedding IReV recognition in statute, the Act advances transparency beyond previous frameworks. It creates a hybrid model—manual voting and collation complemented by electronic visibility. Such hybridity may represent a uniquely Nigerian pathway, blending global best practices with domestic constraints.
Akpabio’s rhetorical framing—distinguishing “noise” from lawmaking—has attracted attention. While critics may interpret it as dismissive, it also speaks to a tension in contemporary democracies: the amplification of vocal minorities through media ecosystems. Legislative legitimacy, however, derives from electoral mandate and constitutional procedure. By emphasizing the “generality of Nigerians,” Akpabio situates himself within a majoritarian democratic theory tempered by rule of law.
The question of disenfranchisement further illuminates his position. If technological failure in insecure or rural areas invalidated results, marginalized communities could bear disproportionate impact. By allowing delayed electronic uploads once connectivity is restored, the Act seeks to reconcile inclusivity with transparency. This compromise reflects distributive sensitivity.
In evaluating Akpabio’s stewardship, one must also consider his broader legislative philosophy. He repeatedly asserts that laws must outlast individuals. This intergenerational perspective discourages tailoring statutes to immediate partisan contests. Whether one agrees with every clause, the emphasis on durability highlights a statesmanlike orientation.
The reactions from civil society, though critical, implicitly acknowledge the dynamic nature of reform. Calls to continue advocating improvements indicate that the 2026 Act is part of an ongoing process. Akpabio himself has stated that doors remain open. This openness suggests confidence rather than defensiveness.
Ultimately, the measure of electoral reform lies not only in statutory text but in implementation. INEC’s capacity, political party behavior, judicial adjudication, and citizen vigilance will shape outcomes. Yet legislation provides the framework within which these actors operate. By integrating electronic viewing, clarifying collation hierarchies, strengthening internal party democracy, and closing disqualification loopholes, the National Assembly has recalibrated that framework.
In positioning Akpabio in a favorable light, it is important to avoid hagiography. Democratic leadership entails contestation. However, his consistent themes—respect for process, infrastructural realism, institutional boundaries, and posterity—form a coherent narrative. Rather than capitulate to populist maximalism or resist reform altogether, he charted a middle course.
Nigeria’s democracy, like many across the globe, navigates between aspiration and capacity. Technological for determinism offers seductive simplicity; constitutional prudence demands complexity. In the crucible of electoral reform, Akpabio has presented himself as a custodian of that prudence. Whether history ultimately vindicates every provision of the 2026 Act will depend on future elections. But as of its enactment, the legislative record reflects a deliberate attempt to harmonize innovation with stability.
The broader democratic project requires precisely this balance. Transparency without feasibility breeds litigation. Feasibility without transparency breeds distrust. By embedding electronic visibility within a manual backbone, the Act seeks equilibrium. In championing this architecture, Akpabio aligns himself with a vision of reform that is incremental yet substantive, cautious yet forward-moving.
As Nigeria approaches future electoral cycles, the real test will be whether citizens experience greater confidence, fewer disputes, and clearer outcomes. Should that occur, the painstaking deliberations defended by the Senate President may be remembered not as noise, but as necessary groundwork. In that sense, Akpabio’s insistence that lawmaking differ from clamor may prove less a rebuke than a reminder: democracy flourishes not only through passion, but through patient construction of rules capable of enduring the storms of politics. Nigeria’s Electoral Future shall have Senator Godswill Akpabio positively mentioned in its repository.
•Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh mnipr
Special Adviser on Media/Publicity and official Spokesperson to the President of the Senate
News6 hours ago
ADC: Fight, scatter them! *Presidency goads Kogi lawmaker on Mark’s leadership
News7 hours ago
Presidency: Tinubu, others to pay N100million for APC nominations
News7 hours ago
Enough! Pursue, overtake, wipe out! *CDS gives new orders against terrorists
-
News4 weeks agoGovernor weeps, as terrorists kill soldiers, police in night ambush
-
Columns2 weeks agoSeun Okinbaloye saga: How does Tinubu survive if Wike resigns?
-
Columns6 days agoAbike Dabiri: Did Obi raise a monster or you’re drunk on Tinubu’s poisoned chalice?
-
News1 week agoStop using Latin phrases, make clear, unambiguous orders – NBA tells courts
-
News4 weeks agoBREAKING: Bloody day in Ibadan! *Trailer loses control, crushes residents!
-
News2 weeks agoNafiu Gombe: Yes, I have sponsors! *I can’t fight ADC big men alone!
-
Columns1 week agoCentus Nweze (JSC): Death of legal purist, irony of Nigerian judiciary
-
Columns2 days agoBe the hero that saved Nigeria! Open letter to Alhaji Atiku Abubakar