By Femi Odere

Thursday, February 20th, was expected to be just another routine day in the Senate plenary, focused on legislative matters outlined in the Order Paper. Nothing could have predicted the drama that unfolded, drawing significant attention to the nation’s Upper Chamber.

After all, the Senate was already in the off-season of its confirmation and rejection game for executive nominees, a period when theatrics often take center stage in the chamber. But this time, the drama arrived unannounced, and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan was at the center of it.

While the facts and the Senate’s standing rules governing its proceedings are already in the public domain, the discussions surrounding this matter need to be properly analyzed. The reality remains that Senate President Godswill Akpabio acted well within his constitutional powers. According to Order 6:1 of the Senate Rule Book, he has the authority to assign seats to senators, while Order 6:2 gives him the power to reassign seats when necessary without prior notice. This is not a new practice; it has been done before without controversy.

The need for seat reassignment on that day arose from the defection of some senators from opposition parties to the ruling party, as well as the reshuffling of Senate committee leadership, which required certain senators to move to accommodate their new roles. These are standard parliamentary practices, not a personal attack on any senator.

Yet, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, directly affected by these changes, raised objections. Her response, which has now gone viral, has been met with mixed reactions. Some argue that her reaction was justified, while others believe it could have been handled differently.

In an ironic twist, Akpoti-Uduaghan demanded that the Senate President respect Order 10, yet she reportedly spoke from a different seat, which some claim was a deviation from Senate rules. Her conduct on that day—marked by strong emotions and passionate advocacy—highlights the importance of decorum in the legislative process.

It appears that some of her colleagues, recognizing the gravity of the situation, advised her to clarify her stance the next day. However, rather than de-escalating, the matter gained further attention. The discussions that followed, both within and outside the Senate, reflect the broader political landscape and the dynamics at play.

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s stance did not occur in isolation. Various perspectives on the matter have been amplified—from political opponents to activists and online commentators—indicating a complex interplay of interests. Some believe the situation is indicative of broader political tensions, while others see it as part of standard legislative discourse.

Make no mistake—this matter has drawn significant attention. The role of the Senate, its leadership, and the responsibilities of its members remain critical to the nation’s democratic process. Ensuring that debates and disagreements are handled with respect and in accordance with established rules is vital for maintaining the integrity of the legislative institution.

The discussions surrounding this issue highlight the importance of constructive engagement in governance. While differing opinions will always exist, the focus should remain on policies, development, and progress for the nation.





https://www.vanguardngr.com/2025/03/it-is-akpabio-but-not-about-akpabio/