State of Emergency Controversy | Akpabio Addresses Alleged $15,000 Bribe to Senators

 

In a breaking development that has gripped Nigeria’s political landscape, Senate President Godswill Akpabio has publicly addressed swirling rumors of a $15,000 bribe allegedly distributed to senators to secure their support for a state of emergency declaration in Rivers State. The statement, reported by Dockaysworld on March 23, 2025, comes amid escalating tensions following President Bola Tinubu’s controversial decision to impose emergency rule in the oil-rich state, suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy Ngozi Odu, and the Rivers State House of Assembly for six months. Akpabio’s response seeks to quell speculation and restore public trust in the legislative process, but it has also reignited debates about transparency and integrity in Nigeria’s National Assembly.

Akpabio’s Defense: A Rejection of Bribery Claims

The Senate President, speaking through his Special Adviser on Media, Hon. Eseme Eyiboh, firmly denied allegations that lawmakers received financial incentives to back the emergency proclamation. Reports had circulated on social media and in some news outlets, claiming that senators were offered $5,000 on Tuesday, March 18, and an additional $10,000 on Wednesday, March 19—the eve of the Senate’s vote on the matter. These payments were allegedly disbursed during a Ramadan fast-breaking event (Iftar) hosted at Akpabio’s Maitama residence in Abuja.

Dismissing the accusations as baseless, Akpabio emphasized that the Iftar gatherings were a longstanding tradition, not a cover for illicit activities. “Since I assumed the role of Senate President, I have hosted colleagues for the breaking of fast,” he said via Eyiboh. “I did it last year, and I’ve done it again this year. Why is it suddenly being twisted into a rumor?” He challenged the logic behind the bribery narrative, asking, “What would I be giving money for? These claims are fabrications meant to fuel malice and hate campaigns against me.”

Eyiboh reiterated that no such payments—whether $5,000, $10,000, or any amount—took place. “People are conjuring these figures to add spice to their smear efforts,” he added. “It’s a tradition I’ve upheld consistently, so why is this year’s event being linked to money?” The Senate President’s camp insists that the allegations are part of a broader effort to tarnish his reputation amid the politically charged Rivers crisis.

The Rivers State Emergency: Context and Controversy

The backdrop to this scandal is President Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State on March 18, 2025, a move that stunned many Nigerians. Citing “disturbing violence” and the “vandalization of petroleum pipelines” linked to a prolonged political feud between Governor Fubara and Federal Capital Territory Minister Nyesom Wike, Tinubu suspended the state’s elected leadership and appointed Retired Vice Admiral Ibokette Ibas as Sole Administrator. The National Assembly, including the Senate under Akpabio’s leadership, approved the proclamation on Thursday, March 20, via a unanimous voice vote—a method that has itself drawn criticism for lacking transparency.

The decision has polarized opinions. Supporters argue it was necessary to stabilize Rivers, a key economic hub due to its oil production, while critics—including some senators—denounce it as an overreach of federal power and a threat to democratic principles. The bribery allegations have only deepened the controversy, with claims suggesting that financial inducements ensured the Senate’s swift approval.

A Closer Look at the Allegations

The rumors of bribery gained traction after reports surfaced that Akpabio hosted senators at his guest house in Maitama on two consecutive nights leading up to the vote. Sources claimed that 45 senators received $5,000 each on Tuesday, followed by 42 senators pocketing $10,000 each on Wednesday, totaling a purported $15,000 per lawmaker. These figures, while unverified, have fueled public outrage and skepticism about the integrity of the legislative process.

Akpabio’s rebuttal hinges on the routine nature of his Iftar gatherings, framing the accusations as a mischaracterization of a cultural and religious practice. However, the timing of the events—coinciding with a contentious vote—has lent credence to suspicions among detractors. Posts on X reflect a mix of sentiments, with some users decrying alleged corruption in the Senate, while others question the plausibility of such large-scale bribery going unnoticed.

Senate Dynamics and Dissent

Despite the unanimous voice vote, not all senators were aligned with the emergency rule. Bayelsa West Senator Seriake Dickson, a former governor and PDP member, reportedly walked out of the chamber before the vote, citing constitutional concerns. Dickson later claimed that he, along with senators like Aminu Tambuwal and Eyinnaya Abaribe, were silenced during the debate, with Akpabio allegedly stifling opposition to ensure a smooth passage. This has raised questions about the voice vote process, which relies on the presiding officer’s subjective judgment rather than a recorded tally, potentially masking dissent.

The Senate’s approval, alongside the House of Representatives, met the constitutional requirement of a two-thirds majority under Section 305 of the Nigerian Constitution. Yet, the lack of a roll-call vote has left room for speculation about how many lawmakers genuinely supported the measure—or whether external influence, monetary or otherwise, swayed the outcome.

Public and Political Fallout

Akpabio’s denial has done little to silence critics who see the Rivers emergency as a power play orchestrated by political heavyweights, including Wike, to undermine Fubara. The PDP Governors’ Forum and several opposition figures have condemned the suspension, with some vowing to challenge it in court. Meanwhile, the Nigeria Governors’ Forum has opted for neutrality, citing its bipartisan nature, further highlighting the divisive nature of the crisis.

For Akpabio, the bribery allegations add another layer of scrutiny to his tenure as Senate President, a role already marked by occasional controversies. His insistence that the claims are a “hate campaign” may resonate with supporters, but it risks deepening public distrust in a political system often perceived as opaque and self-serving.

What’s Next?

As of March 23, 2025, the situation remains fluid. Legal challenges loom, and the judiciary could yet weigh in on the constitutionality of the emergency rule. For now, Akpabio’s statement—detailed in the Dockaysworld report—stands as his official defense against a scandal that threatens to overshadow the Senate’s role in this historic decision. Whether his words can dispel the cloud of suspicion or merely fan the flames of controversy remains to be seen.

What are your thoughts on Akpabio’s response and the broader Rivers crisis? Share your views below as this story continues to unfold!