Nwebonyi Rejects Saraki’s Call for Senate Probe, Calls Natasha’s Claims a Distraction

Senate Deputy Chief Whip, Senator Onyekachi Peter Nwebonyi, has strongly criticized former Senate President, Dr. Abubakar Bukola Saraki, over his call for an open and transparent investigation into allegations of sexual harassment leveled against Senate President Godswill Akpabio by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.

Nwebonyi dismissed Saraki’s demand as a misguided comparison to an ethics inquiry faced by Saraki during his tenure, insisting that the two cases are fundamentally different in “context, substance, and motivation.”

While Saraki argued that an open probe would uphold the integrity of the Senate and ensure due process, Nwebonyi maintained that Natasha’s allegations should not be entertained as a legislative matter. Instead, he characterized them as a politically motivated stunt designed to deflect from her pending disciplinary proceedings.

“If we follow Saraki’s logic, we risk creating a dangerous precedent—one where any habitual liar can fabricate an allegation and expect the Senate to halt its work to investigate baseless claims,” Nwebonyi stated.

The Deputy Chief Whip pointed to what he described as a pattern of reckless allegations from Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, citing past accusations against figures like Reno Omokri, Dino Melaye, and Yahaya Bello, all of which, he argued, lacked credible evidence.

He also raised concerns about the timing of Natasha’s claims, noting that the alleged incident occurred over a year ago but was only brought up after she was summoned for disciplinary action in the Senate.

“There was no prior complaint, no record of distress, no mention to her husband, and no disclosure to female colleagues. Yet, suddenly, when faced with disciplinary proceedings, she introduces these allegations,” Nwebonyi remarked.
Furthermore, he questioned why Natasha chose to make her claims through media interviews rather than addressing them on the Senate floor or through official legislative channels.
“If she truly believed she was a victim, the proper forum for her grievance was the Senate, not a television interview,” he argued.

In response to Saraki’s push for transparency, Nwebonyi dismissed the former Senate President’s case as entirely different.
He explained that Saraki’s ethics probe was an administrative matter concerning the importation of an official vehicle, which was properly handled through the Senate Ethics Committee.
“Saraki’s case was about official duties and institutional accountability. Natasha’s case, however, is about a personal vendetta and an attempt to escape disciplinary action,” Nwebonyi asserted.

Nwebonyi laid out three key steps for addressing the controversy: Natasha must first answer to the Senate Ethics Committee regarding her alleged misconduct. If she has a legitimate harassment claim, she should file a legal case in the appropriate court instead of using the Senate and media as shields and that the Senate must not allow itself to be blackmailed into legitimizing what he called a distraction campaign.
“The Senate must remain focused, maintain order, and refuse to be drawn into an opportunistic media spectacle,” he declared.
With the debate now polarized between calls for an open probe and concerns over political manipulation, the Senate faces a defining moment: Will it entertain Natasha’s allegations, or will it, as Nwebonyi insists, stand firm against what he calls “institutional blackmail”?