In recent years, Nigerian lecturers have been vilified, scapegoated, and subjected to intense scrutiny under the guise of moral purification. The National Assembly went as far as passing a law prescribing severe punishment for any lecturer accused of harassment—ensuring that even mere courtship with a student could lead to dire consequences. This legislative aggression cast lecturers as the primary culprits of moral decadence in higher institutions, making it seem as though no other sector in Nigeria had issues with abuse of power or exploitation.
Yet, today, the very same National Assembly finds itself entangled in a sexual harassment scandal of the highest order. Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has come forward with damning allegations that the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, harassed her. This is not an isolated incident—he was similarly accused by the former head of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) when he was a minister.
This raises a crucial question: What moral standing does Akpabio, and indeed the Senate as an institution, have to legislate on morality when its own leader is facing accusations of sexual misconduct?
If a lecturer, regardless of proof, is presumed guilty and subjected to severe punishment based on mere allegations, why should different standards apply to the Senate President? Shouldn’t Akpabio, in line with the principles of fairness and accountability, immediately step aside for an independent investigation and potential prosecution?
The credibility of governance is on the line. The Nigerian people are watching. If Akpabio is allowed to remain in office while facing these serious allegations, it only confirms what many already suspect—that power in Nigeria is a shield for impunity, and laws are designed only for the weak, not the powerful.
If the National Assembly truly believes in justice, then it must demand Akpabio’s resignation pending the outcome of an investigation. Anything less would be outright hypocrisy.
The same Senate that swiftly passed a law demonizing lecturers must now demonstrate consistency. The moral cleansing they so eagerly pursued must begin at home. If justice is truly blind, then Akpabio must face the same scrutiny and consequences they have imposed on others.
The choice before the Senate is clear: uphold justice or expose itself as an institution of double standards.
Dr. I. M. Lawal, ABU, Zaria lawalabusalma@gmail.com
