Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Kogi Central Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan have declined to comment on fresh allegations by US-based activist Sandra Duru, popularly known as Prof Mgbeke, that Akpabio engaged her to campaign against the senator.
Duru made the allegation in a nine-minute audio recording released on social media on Friday, which circulated widely online on Saturday.
The new account represents a reversal of an earlier claim in which she alleged that Akpoti-Uduaghan had sought to recruit her to make accusations against Akpabio.
Duru presented the latest recording as a preview of further disclosures about her relationship with Akpabio and the long-running controversy involving the Senate President and Akpoti-Uduaghan.
She also released excerpts containing a male voice she identified as Akpabio. The voice allegedly discussed political developments involving former Delta State governor Ifeanyi Okowa and Delta senator Ned Nwoko.
In one excerpt, the senate president allegedly suggested that Okowa’s decision to join the All Progressives Congress was linked to concerns over corruption cases rather than political conviction.
The authenticity of the recording, the identity of the voices and the broader context of the conversation could not be independently verified.
Akpabio’s media aide, Eseme Eyiboh, did not respond to calls and messages seeking his reaction. Akpoti-Uduaghan’s media aide, Mike Idoko, also declined to comment.
“We have no comment on this issue, please,” Idoko said when contacted.
Neither Akpabio nor his office had publicly confirmed or denied the contents or authenticity of the recording as of the time of filing.
Duru’s latest account marks another turn in a dispute that has involved competing allegations from the activist and Akpoti-Uduaghan.
In May 2025, Duru alleged that Akpoti-Uduaghan offered her N200m to make false allegations against Akpabio. Akpoti-Uduaghan rejected the allegation.
The dispute subsequently moved beyond social media, with Akpoti-Uduaghan petitioning the Inspector-General of Police over allegations involving Akpabio and Duru.
Her lawyers described the situation as part of what they characterised as a coordinated campaign against the senator.
Duru’s latest recording now presents a different version of her relationship with Akpabio, placing the Senate President at the centre of an alleged effort to campaign against Akpoti-Uduaghan.
That claim, however, remains an allegation and has not been independently established.
The latest development also comes against the background of separate legal proceedings between Akpoti-Uduaghan and Duru.
In January 2026, a Federal Capital Territory High Court granted an interlocutory injunction restraining Duru and Meta Platforms Inc., the operator of Facebook, from further circulating materials alleged to be defamatory against Akpoti-Uduaghan. The case is Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/229/2025.
Justice I. Mohammed held that the senator’s application raised a “serious question to be tried” and that intervention was warranted pending determination of the substantive case.
The court directed Duru to refrain from publishing, posting, sharing or promoting material containing defamatory, scandalous, inciting or injurious content against Akpoti-Uduaghan pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
Meta was also directed to take down or disable access to offending publications attributed to Duru, including material published under the name Prof Mgbeke.
The order was an interlocutory measure and did not, by itself, determine the truth or otherwise of the allegations contained in the disputed publications.
The controversy has unfolded alongside a separate and highly publicised dispute between Akpabio and Akpoti-Uduaghan over her suspension from the Senate and related legal proceedings.
Akpabio subsequently pursued an appeal at the Supreme Court over decisions of lower courts connected with the suspension dispute, while Akpoti-Uduaghan opposed the application.
The Federal Government also withdrew criminal defamation charges earlier brought against Akpoti-Uduaghan in January 2026, after filing a notice of discontinuance. An Abuja High Court subsequently struck out the case.
The latest audio therefore adds another layer to an already protracted political and legal dispute.
For now, however, the central claims contained in the recording remain unverified. No independent forensic examination of the audio has been publicly disclosed, and the people named in the allegations have not endorsed its contents.
Any determination of the authenticity of the recording, the identity of the voices and the meaning of the conversation would require evidence beyond the recording’s circulation on social media.
Until such evidence or formal responses emerge, the latest claims remain allegations rather than established facts.
