₦airaland Forum

emkz:
Fallacy or ad hominem. A tactic used by gaslightersSince you can't attack the substance, attack the person.

You asked me for evidence, I supplied evidence. You could not debunk the evidence.

You cannot refute Professor Mgbeke's evidence, so you attack her.

The person who brought this matter to the public and even went on a fruitless international media tour is now saying she is tired of the public court because they are defeating her in the public court. That is cowardice.

Neither you nor Natasha can shift the arena to avoid scrutiny.

Your self-righteous tantrum is laughable. You throw around "fallacy" and "gaslighting" like buzzwords hoping they’ll stick, but all you’ve proven is that you can’t handle pushback. You didn’t present evidence—you paraded biased drivel wrapped in self-delusion and expected it to pass unchallenged. And no, questioning the credibility of your so-called “Professor Mgbeke” isn’t ad hominem when her entire narrative is built on conjecture and shaky credentials. If you put a clown in a lab coat, it’s still a clown.

You’re desperate to keep this circus in the "public court" because that’s where gossip thrives and facts die. When people start asking for real proof, you panic and scream “cowardice.” But the truth is, your sideshow only survives in echo chambers.

Nobody’s avoiding scrutiny—we’re demanding real scrutiny, not the kangaroo court of your imagination. You don’t want facts, you want drama. And when the spotlight shifts to expose your weak foundations, suddenly everyone else is “shifting arenas”? Pathetic.

Righteousness2:
You don’t want ISRAEL to BOMB your country?

Maybe, just maybe, don’t fire missiles at ISRAEL then!



This is the airport in Sana’a, Yemen.

The countdown to its COMPLETE DESTRUCTION has just begun!

You cheerlead the destruction of a civilian airport in Sana’a like it's some heroic act—congratulations, you're glorifying terrorism under the flag of self-defense. Let’s be clear: bombing another sovereign nation isn't defense, it’s state-sponsored aggression.


You glorify destruction, but you whine when the tables even slightly turn. You don’t get to bomb the world and cry victim when someone fights back.

emkz:
"Selectively circulated recordings". Oya deny the authenticity.

Let me address you as Natasha 2.0.

Natasha 2.0, you did not counter any point I raised. You have not countered Professor Mgbeke sensibly.

From the get go, we asked Natasha 1.0 to go to court. But she preferred the court of public opinion to get fame. Now that they have defeated her in her turf, you now want to decide the arena for the fight. Can you see how unstable your positions are?

You accepted being cut from the same cloth. Her dossier is in the public domain and so is yours.

Ah, the usual noise—long on drama, short on substance. “Selectively circulated recordings”? That’s your best shot? You’re desperately clinging to doctored clips like a drowning man grabs debris. Deny the authenticity? Absolutely—because fabrications deserve nothing but rejection. Try again.

And don’t flatter yourself by calling me Natasha 2.0. Unlike you, I don’t deal in recycled nonsense and tired smear tactics. You said I didn’t counter your points? Maybe because there was nothing worth countering—just hollow rants dressed up as arguments.

As for Professor Mgbeke, her clown show collapsed under its own contradictions. You called for court? Good. Then why are you now obsessed with the court of public opinion? Because that’s the only place your cheap theatrics get attention.

You talk of instability? Look in the mirror. You lot switch tones and targets more often than a weathervane in a storm. Her dossier is out? So is yours. And if we’re cut from the same cloth, then I guess that makes you the rag.

bixton:
You will only succeed in dribbling yourself and just as Sen. Natasha you will not respond to the direct questions asked.
I guess you'll respond only in court.

Your remarks reflect a dismissive tone that does little to advance constructive dialogue.

Resorting to personal attacks and unfounded assumptions does not substitute for reasoned engagement.

Unlike what you suggest, I have no intention of evading direct questions; however, I will not indulge in rhetoric designed to provoke rather than clarify.

If due process through court is followed to address the matter, so be it—justice is not served through intimidation or mockery, but through facts, evidence, and proper legal channels.

[quote author=emkz post=135259708][/quote]Accusations—no matter how strongly worded—do not become facts without due process and credible, independently verified evidence. Allegations, affidavits, and selectively circulated recordings should not substitute for impartial investigation. Asserting guilt based on hearsay or unverified claims undermines the principles of fairness and justice. If there is genuine concern for truth, then the appropriate legal channels should be allowed to do their work without prejudgment or inflammatory language.

Your assertion is both misleading and unfounded. The absence of presented evidence does not, in itself, constitute evidence of wrongdoing—it is a logical fallacy to presume guilt from silence or delay. Furthermore, calling for accountability from public officials, including Akpabio, is a legitimate civic action when serious allegations arise, whether substantiated or under investigation. To dismiss such concerns as "double standards" ignores the principle of equal scrutiny and the public’s right to demand transparency from those in power. Let us remain focused on facts and uphold due process, rather than resorting to sweeping generalizations or baseless accusations.

I support individuals based on principles, not personal affiliations. If being aligned with integrity and fairness is what you refer to as being 'cut from the same cloth,' then I accept that without hesitation. However, I find it unfortunate that rather than addressing the issue at hand, you've resorted to veiled personal remarks. Let's aim to keep this discussion constructive and focused.

bixton:
(1) Is Sen. Natasha the one that will take the case to the Court especially the HC since she is the one who is dragging the name of the SP ?

(2) Or Sen. Natasha wants the SP to drag her to court where she will formally present her evidence?

Calling for accountability from public officials, including Senator Akpabio, is a legitimate and essential civic responsibility.

In any democratic society, the public has not only the right but also the duty to question and scrutinize those in positions of power—especially when serious allegations have been raised, whether these allegations have been fully substantiated or are still under investigation.

Upholding transparency and demanding integrity from leaders should not be misconstrued as bias, but rather recognized as a cornerstone of good governance and the rule of law.

[quote author=emkz post=135259708][/quote]Accusations—no matter how strongly worded—do not become facts without due process and credible, independently verified evidence. Allegations, affidavits, and selectively circulated recordings should not substitute for impartial investigation. Asserting guilt based on hearsay or unverified claims undermines the principles of fairness and justice. If there is genuine concern for truth, then the appropriate legal channels should be allowed to do their work without prejudgment or inflammatory language.

Your assertion is both misleading and unfounded. The absence of presented evidence does not, in itself, constitute evidence of wrongdoing—it is a logical fallacy to presume guilt from silence or delay. Furthermore, calling for accountability from public officials, including Akpabio, is a legitimate civic action when serious allegations arise, whether substantiated or under investigation. To dismiss such concerns as "double standards" ignores the principle of equal scrutiny and the public’s right to demand transparency from those in power. Let us remain focused on facts and uphold due process, rather than resorting to sweeping generalizations or baseless accusations.

I support individuals based on principles, not personal affiliations. If being aligned with integrity and fairness is what you refer to as being 'cut from the same cloth,' then I accept that without hesitation. However, I find it unfortunate that rather than addressing the issue at hand, you've resorted to veiled personal remarks. Let's aim to keep this discussion constructive and focused.

bixton:
In civilized countries where responsible people bring up allegations, they don't just say it in public and stop there. The moment they make it public, they immediately head to the court, file a case against the individual whom they have accused for the alledged crime and summon the person through the court.
But in Nigeria, we have a gathering of comedy folks who claim to be intelligent, educated, smart but they are only that to their like-minded gullible followers.

Kindly listen to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if you continue to request evidence:

Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has strongly criticized Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Olisa Agbakoba, for demanding that she publicly present evidence to substantiate her sexual harassment allegations against Senate President Godswill Akpabio. In a formal letter dated April 30, addressed to Agbakoba’s chambers, she reiterated her resolve to pursue the case through the appropriate judicial channels—specifically, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory—affirming the veracity of her claims.

Akpoti-Uduaghan firmly rejected Agbakoba’s call for a retraction, asserting that his demand for premature evidence disclosure not only misrepresents standard legal procedures but also disregards established global protocols for handling sexual harassment cases. She emphasized that the evaluation of evidence falls strictly within the purview of the judiciary, not public discourse.

Furthermore, she condemned Agbakoba’s approach as an attempt to undermine due process, warning that any effort to circumvent proper judicial protocol risks eroding the rule of law. She also accused him of engaging in a media campaign aimed at swaying public opinion, stressing that such conduct compromises the integrity of court proceedings. Akpoti-Uduaghan maintained that justice must be pursued within the legal system, not through external pressure or media influence.

emkz:
I have noticed that everything you comment to support Natasha, you get 2 likes and 2 shares. It seems there is a small team of 2 Nairaland Natasha supporters.

Let me put it here.

(1) Natasha lied against Reno, weaponizing her sexuality. After Reno exposed her, she deleted all evidence of her lies. Someone paid Reno compensation.

Can you dispute that Natasha did not lie against Reno?

(2) When Professor Mgbeke surfaced, Natasha claimed not to have known her. Professor Mgbeke supplied evidence where Natasha spoke like a parrot on heat. Natasha, Oby, Abiola and yourself have not been able to debunk anything she said. Questions for you: Was Oby paid by Natasha to disrupt senate investigations? Was Oby referred to as "useful idiot" by Natasha? Did Natasha describe Nigerians as "gullible and hungry"? Are you gullible and hungry?

(3) Natasha has not supplied evidence. Instead of asking her to supply evidence, you want to dictate the arena.

Tell Natasha that if she lied, the least she owes Nigerians is resigning from the senate.

With her behaviour, she is showing that Yahaya Bello wanted to save Nigeria from her witch-hunt.

Let Natasha supply evidence.

Thank you for sharing your perspective. However, I must respectfully disagree with the assertions made in your message, as they appear to rely on unverified claims and lack substantive evidence. Allow me to address your points systematically:

1. Allegations Regarding Reno Omokri: The claim that Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan lied about Reno Omokri and subsequently deleted evidence is a serious accusation that requires credible proof. Without verifiable documentation or a legal ruling confirming these claims, such statements remain speculative. It is unfair to demand that I dispute an unproven allegation. Instead, the burden of proof lies with those making the claim to provide concrete evidence, such as court documents or public records, rather than relying on social media narratives.

2. Claims Regarding Professor Mgbeke and Others: Your reliance on Professor Mgbeke’s allegations is equally flimsy. You cite supposed evidence of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s conduct but fail to produce any tangible proof, such as recordings, emails, or sworn testimonies. The inflammatory phrases you use—“parrot on heat,” “useful idiot,” and claims of derogatory remarks about Nigerians—are not only unprofessional but also irrelevant without substantiation. Your questions about payments to Oby or descriptions of Nigerians as “gullible and hungry” are speculative and lack any foundation. I will not dignify such unfounded provocations with a response beyond this: provide evidence or cease spreading these falsehoods.

3. Demand for Evidence and Resignation: Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, like any public official, should be held accountable based on verifiable evidence. However, demanding her resignation without presenting credible proof of wrongdoing is premature and unfair. The assertion that she must “supply evidence” in response to unspecified allegations is vague and shifts the burden of proof inappropriately. Additionally, the reference to Yahaya Bello “saving Nigeria” from a “witch-hunt” is a subjective opinion that lacks context or evidence and does not contribute to a constructive dialogue.

Your comment about likes and shares on my posts is a distraction and irrelevant to the truth. Social media metrics do not validate or invalidate facts, and such remarks only weaken your position.

I challenge you to produce verifiable evidence to support your claims. Until you do, your accusations are nothing more than noise, and I will continue to support Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan against such unfounded attacks. Engage in fact-based discourse or refrain from spreading misinformation.

sailor2011:
Senator Natasha has been humbled
...perhaps subdued as well by Dr Duru's explosive podcast 😄😄😄...I read the feeble response Natasha gave to counter Prof mgbeke's claims...it was nothing compared to her satirical apology ...the question is : has Natasha lost her voice ?😁

Response to Your Misinformed Message

Your message falsely claims Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is “humbled” or “subdued” by Dr. Duru’s podcast, misrepresenting her resolute response denouncing Duru’s “untrue” allegations as manipulated.

Her statement, far from “feeble,” promises a detailed rebuttal, showing strength, not silence.

The “satirical apology” strategically exposed Senate injustice, not defeat.

Your mocking question about her voice is baseless—she actively pursues her lawsuit and advocacy.

Retract your misleading, derisive claims and respect the gravity of this matter.

bixton:
It is very good AriseTV is tilting this way and much more. Let Sen. Natasha bring her evidence or remain silent forever and not come up here with selection not erection and also not tell us only give such to the court for proper judicial process.....

She either comes out clean or she should know that she will never get another election from her constituency and no court will rule in her favour. This her very act If no evidence comes from her will send a bad message about the women folk.

I am writing to formally address your message, which is replete with unfounded assertions, inappropriate demands, and offensive implications that require a clear and resolute counter-response.

Your suggestion that Senator Natasha must either produce evidence immediately or “remain silent forever” is both unreasonable and dismissive of the complexities surrounding allegations of this nature. The legal and personal processes for addressing such claims are not dictated by arbitrary ultimatums. Your flippant reference to “selection not erection” is not only irrelevant but also unprofessional, detracting from the gravity of the issue at hand. Furthermore, your insistence that she reserve evidence solely for the courts ignores the reality that public discourse often accompanies legal proceedings, particularly in matters of public interest.

Your threat that Senator Natasha will “never get another election from her constituency” and that “no court will rule in her favour” unless she complies with your demands is an outrageous attempt to intimidate and prejudge her case. Such statements are not only speculative but also undermine the democratic process and judicial independence. The validity of her allegations should be assessed through evidence and due process, not through coercive rhetoric or assumptions about electoral or judicial outcomes.

Most disturbingly, your claim that Senator Natasha’s actions, if unsubstantiated, will “send a bad message about the women folk” is deeply regressive and offensive. This assertion unfairly generalizes her conduct to all women, perpetuating harmful stereotypes and implying that her actions reflect on an entire gender. Such a statement is not only irrelevant to the merits of her case but also contributes to a culture that discourages women from coming forward with legitimate grievances.

In conclusion, your message is an unacceptable blend of intimidation, prejudice, and misinformation. Senator Natasha’s allegations deserve to be evaluated through a fair, evidence-based process, not subjected to your baseless demands or inflammatory rhetoric. I strongly urge you to retract your statements and adopt a more responsible and respectful approach to this serious matter.

galantjoe:
If a crime is committed and a Suspect denied it. The onus is for the complainant to prove beyond reasonable doubt by presenting convincing evidence that the suspect actually committed the crime. If society goes by what you said that means one day someone will start to accuse everyone especially their enemies

She who alleges must prove

Kindly listen to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if you continue to request evidence:

Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has criticized SAN Olisa Agbakoba for demanding evidence of her sexual harassment allegations against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

In a formal letter, she reaffirmed her commitment to pursuing the case in court, asserting her petition reflects the truth.

Akpoti-Uduaghan rejected Agbakoba’s call for a retraction, stating his demand misrepresents legal procedure and global standards for handling such cases.

She emphasized that evidence evaluation rests solely with the courts, condemning his approach as undermining due process.

Additionally, she accused Agbakoba of a media campaign on Akpabio’s behalf, warning that such actions compromise judicial integrity.

She vowed to disclose further details only through proper legal channels, cautioning against subverting the rule of law.

kedeojo:
Free what, you so called northerners that taught you can denied Tinubu re election with propaganda has failed. It will get to the root and exposed Natasha's opposition evil agenda. With those obvious fact, nobody can convince me to change my mind that Natasha is wrong. Over 72hrs, she has not be able to bring her fact.

Kindly listen to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if you continue to request evidence:

Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has strongly criticized Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Olisa Agbakoba, for demanding that she publicly present evidence to substantiate her sexual harassment allegations against Senate President Godswill Akpabio. In a formal letter dated April 30, addressed to Agbakoba’s chambers, she reiterated her resolve to pursue the case through the appropriate judicial channels—specifically, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory—affirming the veracity of her claims.

Akpoti-Uduaghan firmly rejected Agbakoba’s call for a retraction, asserting that his demand for premature evidence disclosure not only misrepresents standard legal procedures but also disregards established global protocols for handling sexual harassment cases. She emphasized that the evaluation of evidence falls strictly within the purview of the judiciary, not public discourse.

Furthermore, she condemned Agbakoba’s approach as an attempt to undermine due process, warning that any effort to circumvent proper judicial protocol risks eroding the rule of law. She also accused him of engaging in a media campaign aimed at swaying public opinion, stressing that such conduct compromises the integrity of court proceedings. Akpoti-Uduaghan maintained that justice must be pursued within the legal system, not through external pressure or media influence.

emkz:
In fairness to Rufai, he had asked Natasha if she had evidence the very first day she made the allegations on their station.

Natasha raised her voice as though she didn't want scrutiny.

When other journalists in BBC, Sky and DQ News mentioned that she was suspended for shouting like a market woman, she attempted to undermine that point.

It is wrong to weaponize allegations of sexual harassment. It is wrong to have kept quiet for too long and only talking when the chips were down, i.e., when she apparently lost favours from Akpabio.

Natasha, you have lied twice against Reno and Mgbeke. Give us reasons to believe you this time, or you lied again.

Your message is a revolting concoction of lies, prejudice, and vile rhetoric that I’m tearing apart right now.

You dare suggest Ms. Natasha’s raised voice with Rufai proves she’s dodging scrutiny? That’s utter garbage. Her tone doesn’t invalidate her allegations—it shows the raw emotion of confronting a grave issue. Using her voice to dismiss her claims is a cowardly dodge of the truth.

Throwing around unverified nonsense about BBC, Sky, and DQ News calling her a “market woman” for shouting, and claiming she was suspended? That’s not just baseless—it’s despicable. That phrase is a cheap slur, and you’ve got no evidence to back your smear. Stop peddling this trash.

Accusing Ms. Natasha of “weaponizing” sexual harassment allegations is beyond disgusting. You’ve got zero proof her claims are false, yet you slander her as a manipulator. Mocking her for speaking out “when the chips were down” proves you’re ignorant of the fear and pressure survivors face. Your reckless judgment is a slap in the face to justice.

And demanding she prove her credibility over alleged lies against Reno and Mgbeke? That’s a pathetic, desperate ploy to bury her case. Her allegations stand on their own and demand investigation, not your biased, baseless verdict. You’re not the arbiter of truth—stop acting like it.

Your message is a shameful assault on decency and the seriousness of sexual harassment. Retract your lies and quit this vile crusade. Ms. Natasha’s claims deserve rigorous investigation, not your toxic, unfounded attacks.

bixton:
It is very obvious that you did not read your initial comment that I responded to and that's the reason you still went on to spill another I don't know even though all that I mentioned was just your statements as you said were spoken by your lovely Sen. Natasha.

I'm not interested in your pointless, meaningless, and illogical anti-Natasha sentiment. Bye!

franugo:
Your last statement is not rooted in any known legal or cultural base. Legally, you must have heard the phrase "innocent till proven guilty", culturally, you must also have heard the adage "silence is the best answer for a fool". I am not trying to call anyone a fool of course, just disputing your last statement as it's wrong on all levels.

Your invocation of "innocent until proven guilty" ironically undermines your own argument—Sen. Natasha’s shift to judicial channels upholds this principle, unlike your premature public demands for evidence.

Cultural proverbs, while poetic, are irrelevant to legal discourse. If fairness matters, let due process prevail over rhetoric.

emkz:
CreativeOrbit, Principal Advocate of Natasha Affairs.

This entire matter was started by Natasha on Arise News. She went to IPU, Sky, BBC and DW. She also created a social media buzz by flying a helicopter to her rally.

Suddenly, she wants to shift the goal post and you, her advocate, is asking us to follow her. If you have followed her blindly, we won't. It is preposterous that Natasha wants to be the referee in the fight she started.

We say no. You brought the matter to the public, supply evidence in public or even the courts. She has done neither. She is taking Nigerians on a merry go round and we say it's enough.

Even Natasha does not have respect for the rule of law. The same court you are praising ordered that both herself and the accused refrained from discussing the matter. She went ahead to submit a tasteless letter to Akpabio saying foolish things like winning her election through election and not erection, and praising herself as a stubborn woman. If you studied law, that is contempt.

Natasha wanted to create a media buzz to force Akpabio to step down to give her the illusion of power. She failed woefully.

She has also demonstrated a credibility issue. She lied against Reno, she also lied against knowing Professor Mgbeke.

Now, CreativeOrbit, tell us why we should believe her without evidence.

You must be aware that we are educated on deflection tactics, narcissistic tendencies and grand manipulation used by people boxed to the corners.

Natasha lied against Apkabio if she has no evidence (witnesses, records, etc) to back up her claims.

Akpabio is not someone easy to like, but he is winning in the court of public opinion because it seems Natasha is capitalizing on people's ill-feeling towards him.

We'd defend truth and justice. Natasha wants none of those.

emkz, Chief Representative and Liaison for Akpabio Interests.

Your argument hinges on selective scrutiny.

Sen. Natasha’s media engagement exposed systemic issues, while her shift to judicial due process aligns with legal propriety—unlike your inconsistent demand for "public evidence" after dismissing her right to a fair hearing.

Contempt claims require judicial determination, not armchair verdicts. If truth matters, let the courts decide—not mob sentiment.

bixton:
I do not know who you stand with and if you're on the side of justice or emotional sentiment !!!!


If Sen. Natasha is condemning someone in engaging in media campaign and swaying public opinion as such compromises the integrity of the court proceedings......

Please is the above statement from her not hypocritical ?


Sen. Natasha publicly accused the Senate President and through his lawyer she has been asked to supply evidence publicly as well. But she is now saying that she will do such evidence through the appropriate judicial channels especially the FCT HC to affirm the veracity of her claims !!!!!

At what time did she realize that and why did she in the first instance make the allegations publicly when should have approached the appropriate judicial channels and why wait till now to voice such allegations when it has happened many months ago ?



Does Sen. Natasha look like someone who wants to go to court on that issue or probably she is still gathering sexual harassment evidences against the Senate President for something that happened to her!!!!

Maybe she knows there are Nigerians who don't have brains to reason objectively to resolve issues like this and would rather join the cart being pulled by the cow....

Your assertions lack logical consistency and factual grounding. Sen. Natasha’s initial public statement aimed to highlight grave allegations, while her subsequent commitment to judicial due process demonstrates respect for legal integrity—unlike your baseless insinuations.

Accusing others of lacking objectivity while resorting to inflammatory rhetoric undermines your credibility. If you seek justice, engage substantively rather than peddling conjecture.

TopBanter:
Bro, I fear for your safely in this world of sin and evil people.

So, after all that has transpired, you continue to view Natasha a saint and Akpabio some sexual predator and murderer as Natasha alleges yet never produces evidence to back any of her many allegations?

I don't even know what to say to people like you.

Kindly listen to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if you continue to request evidence:

Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has strongly criticized Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Olisa Agbakoba, for demanding that she publicly present evidence to substantiate her sexual harassment allegations against Senate President Godswill Akpabio. In a formal letter dated April 30, addressed to Agbakoba’s chambers, she reiterated her resolve to pursue the case through the appropriate judicial channels—specifically, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory—affirming the veracity of her claims.

Akpoti-Uduaghan firmly rejected Agbakoba’s call for a retraction, asserting that his demand for premature evidence disclosure not only misrepresents standard legal procedures but also disregards established global protocols for handling sexual harassment cases. She emphasized that the evaluation of evidence falls strictly within the purview of the judiciary, not public discourse.

Furthermore, she condemned Agbakoba’s approach as an attempt to undermine due process, warning that any effort to circumvent proper judicial protocol risks eroding the rule of law. She also accused him of engaging in a media campaign aimed at swaying public opinion, stressing that such conduct compromises the integrity of court proceedings. Akpoti-Uduaghan maintained that justice must be pursued within the legal system, not through external pressure or media influence.

emkz:
Why don't you ask Natasha to supply evidence. She made an allegation and you all have applauded her. We asked her for evidence.

Natasha is too fickle to take Nigerians on a ride.

Kindly listen to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if you continue to request evidence:

Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has strongly criticized Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Olisa Agbakoba, for demanding that she publicly present evidence to substantiate her sexual harassment allegations against Senate President Godswill Akpabio. In a formal letter dated April 30, addressed to Agbakoba’s chambers, she reiterated her resolve to pursue the case through the appropriate judicial channels—specifically, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory—affirming the veracity of her claims.

Akpoti-Uduaghan firmly rejected Agbakoba’s call for a retraction, asserting that his demand for premature evidence disclosure not only misrepresents standard legal procedures but also disregards established global protocols for handling sexual harassment cases. She emphasized that the evaluation of evidence falls strictly within the purview of the judiciary, not public discourse.

Furthermore, she condemned Agbakoba’s approach as an attempt to undermine due process, warning that any effort to circumvent proper judicial protocol risks eroding the rule of law. She also accused him of engaging in a media campaign aimed at swaying public opinion, stressing that such conduct compromises the integrity of court proceedings. Akpoti-Uduaghan maintained that justice must be pursued within the legal system, not through external pressure or media influence.

franugo:
You're taking offence where there's none. You keep saying same things over and over again like a recording which is what I pointed out, how's that an insult? An issue we have as humans is the rush to pick offence at everything instead of thinking it through. Now that that's covered, let me try to use another example to break things down. Efcc has several cases against people that have embezzled out collective fund, now imagine that efcc come out today and say that Akpabio stole 100billion, akpabio replies and say he didn't. Efcc says they have evidence but they won't take akpabio to court, instead they prefer to ONLY slander his name, that is enough repercussion for them...does this scenario make sense? Of course Akpabio will be happy for efcc not to take the matter to court , you've slandered his name but he has not lost anything, no one thinks he's a saint anyway. Even if he's innocent, odds are if he is innocent of that particular claim, there's other things that might be uncovered if he takes the first step to institute a legal case against efcc for slander, and why should he? Efcc's outcry has not affected him in any way because they're unfounded till proven. Hope you got me now?

Kindly listen to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if you continue to request evidence:

Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has criticized Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Olisa Agbakoba, for demanding evidence to support her sexual harassment allegation against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

In a letter dated April 30, she reaffirmed her commitment to pursuing the case in the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory.

Akpoti-Uduaghan rejected Agbakoba’s request for retraction, arguing that premature evidence disclosure misrepresents legal procedures and global standards for handling sexual harassment cases.

She described Agbakoba’s actions as undermining due process and warned against circumventing judicial protocol.

She further accused him of conducting a media campaign to influence public perception, asserting that justice must be pursued within the courts, not through the press.

ozo13:
u also know Natasha is a lawyer and I expect her to provide evidence that the media razzmatazz she was doing back then.Now like she got a match in that Prof Duru and it's now obvious people want her to show evidence iff indeed there was sexual harassment .Same way Akpabio wife sue Natasha is same way am expecting Natasha to sue the Duru woman too if actually Natasha feel it's a lie

Kindly listen to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if you continue to request evidence:

Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has criticized Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Olisa Agbakoba, for demanding evidence to support her sexual harassment allegation against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

In a letter dated April 30, she reaffirmed her commitment to pursuing the case in the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory.

Akpoti-Uduaghan rejected Agbakoba’s request for retraction, arguing that premature evidence disclosure misrepresents legal procedures and global standards for handling sexual harassment cases.

She described Agbakoba’s actions as undermining due process and warned against circumventing judicial protocol.

She further accused him of conducting a media campaign to influence public perception, asserting that justice must be pursued within the courts, not through the press.

Thewesterner:
I get your point. Both Natasha and Akpabio are both guilty of this in my opinion.

"The purported social media maneuvers, evidently supported by his allies, represent a futile endeavor to solicit public sympathy and evade established legal protocols"

Maybe she should have snippets of some her evidences with AriseTv, BBC while doing her media rounds.
I Might be wrong sha

Kindly listen to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if you continue to request evidence:

Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has criticized Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Olisa Agbakoba, for demanding evidence to support her sexual harassment allegation against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

In a letter dated April 30, she reaffirmed her commitment to pursuing the case in the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory.

Akpoti-Uduaghan rejected Agbakoba’s request for retraction, arguing that premature evidence disclosure misrepresents legal procedures and global standards for handling sexual harassment cases.

She described Agbakoba’s actions as undermining due process and warned against circumventing judicial protocol.

She further accused him of conducting a media campaign to influence public perception, asserting that justice must be pursued within the courts, not through the press.

ozo13:
u also know Natasha is a lawyer and I expect her to provide evidence that the media razzmatazz she was doing back then.Now like she got a match in that Prof Duru and it's now obvious people want her to show evidence iff indeed there was sexual harassment .Same way Akpabio wife sue Natasha is same way am expecting Natasha to sue the Duru woman too if actually Natasha feel it's a lie

If he genuinely believes he has been wronged, Akpabio ought to gather all relevant evidence along with the testimonies of his supporters and present them before a competent court of law.

The ongoing social media campaigns, allegedly sponsored by his allies, amount to nothing more than a weak attempt at public sympathy and a diversion from due process.

franugo:
You're taking offence where there's none. You keep saying same things over and over again like a recording which is what I pointed out, how's that an insult? An issue we have as humans is the rush to pick offence at everything instead of thinking it through. Now that that's covered, let me try to use another example to break things down. Efcc has several cases against people that have embezzled out collective fund, now imagine that efcc come out today and say that Akpabio stole 100billion, akpabio replies and say he didn't. Efcc says they have evidence but they won't take akpabio to court, instead they prefer to ONLY slander his name, that is enough repercussion for them...does this scenario make sense? Of course Akpabio will be happy for efcc not to take the matter to court , you've slandered his name but he has not lost anything, no one thinks he's a saint anyway. Even if he's innocent, odds are if he is innocent of that particular claim, there's other things that might be uncovered if he takes the first step to institute a legal case against efcc for slander, and why should he? Efcc's outcry has not affected him in any way because they're unfounded till proven. Hope you got me now?

Your argument is flawed. If EFCC alleges corruption but refuses to pursue legal action, it undermines accountability and public trust.

Allowing slander without due process sets a dangerous precedent. If Akpabio is innocent, he should challenge the claims in court to clear his name—silence implies complicity.

LibertyRep:
Hasn't Akpabio's wife sued Natasha already?
Isn't that enough from the family to acid duplication of court cases?

Just curious

No! Not at all. Akpabio's lawyer has threatened legal action against Natasha Akpoti.

One must ask: why has it taken so long for Senator Akpabio to initiate legal action against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if he is confident in his claims?

emkz:
Why don't you ask Natasha to supply evidence. She made an allegation and you all have applauded her. We asked her for evidence.

Natasha is too fickle to take Nigerians on a ride.

Akpabio's lawyer has threatened legal action against Natasha Akpoti.

One must ask: why has it taken so long for Senator Akpabio to initiate legal action against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if he is confident in his claims?

A fitting comparison is the prompt response of the Falanas, who wasted no time in suing VDM when defamed.

franugo:
Talking to you is like speaking to a recording, let's bring it home a little. If I steal your property, am I, the robber, the one that'll visit the police to report myself? No, you, the person that was robbed will be the one doing the reporting and providing evidence against me. It's the same here bro, Natasha levelled an allegation against SP, she should be the one to provide the evidence, not the other way round.

Franugo,
It is unclear to me why insults are frequently employed in what should be a reasoned discussion.

For the topic at hand, Akpabio's lawyer has threatened legal action against Natasha Akpoti.

One must ask: why has it taken so long for Senator Akpabio to initiate legal action against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan if he is confident in his claims?

A fitting comparison is the prompt response of the Falanas, who wasted no time in suing VDM when defamed.

emkz:
I agree with you.



Madam, go and tell Natasha to bring evidence. She desperately tried to whip up public sentiments against Akpabio who is a thoroughly unlikable fellow. She succeeded initially. We want to see the end of the matter. Considering Natasha has lied against Reno in the past, there is a likelihood that she has lied again against Akpabio. Did Natasha not lie that she didn't know Mgbeke until Mgbeke proved Natasha is a parrot on oral heat?

Let me conclude by saying: Natasha is no Helen of Troy; Nigerians will not go to war because of her tantrums... or yours.

EMKZ,
If he genuinely believes he has been wronged, Akpabio ought to gather all relevant evidence along with the testimonies of his supporters and present them before a competent court of law.

The ongoing social media campaigns, allegedly sponsored by his allies, amount to nothing more than a weak attempt at public sympathy and a diversion from due process.

Note. I'm not a woman.

franugo:
Hello again creative, have you not heard the saying that the defendant is innocent till proven guilty? SP is thus innocent till proven guilty, the onus lies on Natasha, she made the allegations, she should be the one to substantiate it, SP does not have to do anything.

Franugo, I repeat:
If he genuinely believes he has been wronged, Akpabio ought to gather all relevant evidence along with the testimonies of his supporters and present them before a competent court of law. The ongoing social media campaigns, allegedly sponsored by his allies, amount to nothing more than a weak attempt at public sympathy and a diversion from due process.

franugo:
Hello creativeorbit, your comment should also count for Natasha, she started this whole debacle by bringing up allegations against SP with no evidence provided. She also was the one that took the matter to international bodies also with no evidence, she has done way more on SM bro.

Franugo, Rather than engaging in orchestrated social media campaigns, he should pursue redress through the judicial system. If Senator Akpabio genuinely believes he has been defamed, he is obliged to assemble pertinent evidence and supporter testimonies for adjudication in a court of competent jurisdiction.

The ongoing social media efforts, purportedly supported by his associates, constitute an inadequate attempt to garner public sympathy and circumvent due process.

LibertyRep:
Seems like many episodes will unfold.

The issue is simple and straightforward, na people just dey use English and emotions confuse themselves.

Natasha has the key to resolving all these; provide evidence of sexual harassment and see how 'sensible' people will descend on Akpabio.

Imagine if people had descended on Reno back then and it turned out to be a false alarm once bitten...

Enough of gender manipulation

Senator Godswill Akpabio is a qualified and practicing lawyer prior to his political career, is well-versed in the legal mechanisms available for addressing defamation or false allegations.

Rather than engaging in orchestrated social media campaigns, he should pursue redress through the judicial system. If Senator Akpabio genuinely believes he has been defamed, he is obliged to assemble pertinent evidence and supporter testimonies for adjudication in a court of competent jurisdiction.

The ongoing social media efforts, purportedly supported by his associates, constitute an inadequate attempt to garner public sympathy and circumvent due process.

The delay in initiating legal proceedings against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, contrasted with the expeditious response of the Falanas in a similar case, raises pertinent questions.

Senator Akpabio must undertake resolute legal action, eschewing social media strategies, to resolve this matter appropriately within the judiciary.