The allegations made by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, representing Kogi State at the National Assembly, against the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, have not only sparked national debates but also raised suspicions about the morality and character of our elites in leadership—especially within the institution of the Senate. This essay aims to examine various public perspectives and perceptions, as well as the implications for public trust and confidence in leadership, which are crucial for the success and influence of any government.
To begin with, Senator Natasha has already gained considerable public attention for her vocal nature, long before her current senatorial role. Known for her boldness and fearlessness, this is not the first time she has made public allegations of sexual harassment.
Around October last year, Natasha recounted her experience of being sexually harassed by a politician when she sought assistance from him. This revelation made headlines and drew attention to her advocacy. Natasha further made waves when she rejected a congratulatory message from the former Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello, claiming he had once orchestrated plans for her assassination. Her passionate stance against sexual harassment stems from her disbelief that those in positions of power—who should willingly offer assistance—often exploit vulnerable women instead.
Given her past experiences and her growing platform, the public expected Natasha to evolve her approach—moving from allegations to presenting solid evidence, employing strategic methods, and making airtight cases. Especially now, when a “big catch” like the Senate President is involved, her fight against sexual harassment in high places would carry greater weight if backed by clear proof rather than emotional declarations.
However, the timing of her latest allegations—coming only after her removal as Chairperson of the Senate Committee on Local Content—has cast doubt on her motives. Many wonder why she waited until she lost her position before speaking out, which undermines her credibility in the eyes of some observers.
As someone who has embraced the role of a serial victim and advocate, Natasha is expected to adopt a more proactive approach—reporting cases unprovoked, with compelling evidence, to help create a society where women’s dignity is safeguarded.
Another school of thought suggests that some women, when cornered or embarrassed, resort to using their most potent societal weapon—accusations of sexual misconduct—leveraging the societal tendency to believe women first. Historically, women are perceived as shy, reserved, and unlikely to make such allegations without good cause, making this tactic particularly effective. This is why wise men often avoid direct confrontations with women, aware that even innocent exchanges could be twisted into damaging accusations.
There’s also the perception that Natasha’s beauty, intelligence, and political daring have made her a target—not just of admiration but of suspicion. Some assume that powerful men naturally desire her, while others suspect she may have intentionally placed herself in compromising situations to advance her career. Her failure to present concrete evidence, while seemingly relying on her appearance and charisma to sway public opinion, has made her motives appear questionable to some.
However, Natasha’s allegations are not entirely dismissed, especially in light of similar accusations made against Akpabio by former NDDC MD, Mrs. Joy Nunieh. This history lends some credence to Natasha’s claims and fuels the growing perception that the spoils of political office—wealth, power, and privilege—contribute to moral decay. With the power to create millionaires or destroy careers, those in high office often succumb to arrogance and abuse, exploiting vulnerable women along the way.
The allure of power, influence, and wealth can indeed tempt individuals into ethical lapses. Research shows that power can create a sense of invincibility, leading individuals to prioritize personal interests over professional duties. This sense of entitlement can result in inappropriate behavior, including sexual harassment, particularly when powerful individuals believe they are untouchable.
Studies have also demonstrated that power alters behavior, making people less empathetic and more prone to exploiting others. This is especially concerning in environments where power imbalance is extreme—such as between senators and subordinates.
There’s also the counter-narrative that Natasha may be fabricating these allegations. If Akpabio had indeed harassed her, some argue that he would not have felt bold enough to publicly strip her of her committee chairmanship, fearing exposure. His public show of strength, they argue, is not the behavior of a guilty man. Conversely, Natasha’s hesitation to disclose the harassment earlier weakens her position, making her appear reactive rather than proactive.
The case also revives interest in research findings highlighting that women in positions of power are more vulnerable to harassment, with fewer protections. A Swedish study found that women in supervisory roles faced 30 to 100% more sexual harassment than their peers, while research in the American Sociological Review showed female supervisors were 138% more likely to experience harassment and 3.5 times more likely to label their experiences as such. This phenomenon—where power does not shield women but exposes them further—is known as the Paradox of Power.
It’s important to note that men in power also face harassment from women, but the data overwhelmingly shows that women in leadership are more frequent targets, often from male colleagues or subordinates seeking to undermine their authority.
In navigating these complex dynamics, both Natasha and Akpabio must understand that personal character references from spouses—whether Natasha’s reliance on her husband or Akpabio’s wife defending him—are insufficient as credible evidence. The public demands more than personal testimonials when such serious allegations are at play.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of this saga is the perception that some lawmakers see personal pleasure—sexual or otherwise—as an entitlement of power. This fuels concerns that Nigeria’s leadership culture has normalized a system where wealth, power, and access to women are intertwined perks of political office.
It also raises concerns about the growing trend of young women seeking fame through social media, driven by the desire to catch the attention of powerful men who can transform their financial status overnight. This culture, where “the other room” becomes a gateway to influence and wealth, echoes the observations of thinker Chinweizu Ibekwe, who warned of the hidden power of women over men. This dynamic, no doubt, contributes to Nigeria’s broader governance failures—favoritism, nepotism, waste, and mismanagement.
Ramadan Kareem to all Muslim faithful.
bagudum75@gmail.com
