…Unveils loopholes as recall petition falters, urges INEC to tighten laws
…Says homecoming helicopter entrance was her husband’s idea, no laws broken
…INEC denies bias in rejection of recall petition, reaffirms compliance with legal procedures
By Sodiq Adelakun
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan of Kogi Central has vowed to present evidence of sexual harassment against Senate President Godswill Akpabio at an appropriate time.
The embattled lawmaker made this revelation on Thursday during an appearance on Channels Television’s Politics Today program, where she discussed her ongoing political challenges and allegations.
“I will present the evidence that I have, at the right time and in the right space,” Natasha asserted, hinting at the possibility of unveiling the evidence soon.
She did not provide further details about the nature of the evidence, leaving the public awaiting more information.
In the same interview, Natasha addressed the recent decision by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to reject a petition seeking her recall from the Senate.
While the petition was ultimately dismissed, Natasha expressed that, although belated, INEC’s decision was the right one.
“This recall petition should have been thrown out a long time ago. But I’m glad INEC has finally done the right thing,” she said.
The petition, which had failed to meet constitutional requirements, was dismissed by the electoral body.
She pointed out significant flaws in the process surrounding her attempted recall, emphasising that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should have dismissed the petition from the outset.
According to the senator, there were numerous red flags indicating that the recall process was riddled with fraudulent intentions.
She noted, “I’m a senator, and I understand how Nigeria works. And for me, the most important thing is that this recall process has been stalled, and I give kudos and credit to INEC, even though I believe they should have thrown it out from the start.”
One of the major concerns raised by Natasha was the issue of a false address cited in the petition. She explained that an address listed in the recall document, purportedly just five minutes away from her residence, turned out to be non-existent upon investigation.
“Most of the streets in my hometown are not labelled, so when I sent people to verify, they found that no such address exists,” she revealed, underscoring the lack of credibility in the petition.
Further highlighting discrepancies, Natasha pointed to the questionable origins of the petition.
“The cover letter of the petition came from the ‘Kogi Central Political Frontier. We ran a check with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), and that organisation does not exist,” she stated.
This led the senator to question the legitimacy of the petition’s sponsors, urging INEC to address the issue of whether an unregistered body can initiate a recall against a sitting senator.
In her closing remarks, Natasha called on INEC to consider tightening the laws governing the recall process to prevent such attempts from recurring.
“These are the kinds of loopholes INEC needs to examine. I believe that, in this case, the petition should have been dismissed from the start,”she added.
Also, she disclosed that the idea to use a helicopter for her dramatic entrance during her recent constituency visit was suggested by her husband.
This revelation comes amidst the backdrop of a state-imposed ban on political rallies and restrictions on convoys in Kogi, which had been introduced due to security concerns.
She explained that the roads leading to her hometown were blocked, a move she believed was politically motivated.
“It was my husband’s idea. You know they blocked all the roads leading to my house, so my husband suggested we fly in with a helicopter,” she said.
Despite the restrictions, a large crowd of her supporters defied the government ban and gathered to welcome her in Ihima, Okehi Local Government Area.
Addressing her supporters, Natasha made an emphatic statement, declaring, “This is my home, this is my town. Nobody can stop me from coming home. I am the daughter of the late Dr. Abdul Akpoti.”
On her choice of transportation, she insisted that she had not broken any laws.
“I own the place where people gathered. I built the road that leads to my house. So, I broke no law,” she asserted. Natasha further argued that the ban on rallies appeared to be aimed specifically at her, pointing to the timing of the restrictions which coincided with her planned visit.
In the same vein, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has refuted allegations of partisanship in its handling of the failed recall process for Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, representing Kogi Central.
The Commission’s Chief Press Secretary, Rotimi Oyekanmi, addressed concerns on Channels Television’s Politics Today on Thursday, asserting that the petition was rejected solely on the grounds of procedural deficiencies.
Oyekanmi clarified that the petition to recall Senator Natasha, which had sparked controversy among Nigerians, did not meet the necessary legal requirements.
“In the case of the Kogi Central District, we received a petition and a cover letter. What Nigerians were saying was that we were taking sides.
“But what happened was that in the covering letter, the representatives of the petitioners did not include their address as required in our regulations and guidelines. We simply asked them to supply their address, it has nothing to do with the petition,” he explained.
He emphasised that the absence of an address in the cover letter was not grounds for INEC to dismiss the petition, as there is no legal provision requiring such an action.
“There is nowhere in the law where INEC is asked to reject a petition just because the cover letter did not contain the address. So, there was no hanky-panky in what we did,” Oyekanmi clarified.
Oyekanmi also addressed the possibility of the petition being refiled, noting that the law does not specify how many times a recall petition can be initiated.
“The law just talks about the threshold—50 percent plus one signature is required. The law does not specify how many times you can undertake that,” he added.
