By Dr. Tonye Clinton Jaja
Dear Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), Sir,
I promise you that this is the third and final letter that I am going to write to you on this matter.
As I said in my previous letter, my interest in providing these pieces of free legal advisory is because I am a legal author and commentator on current legal issues that affect the public interests of Nigerians.
Without much ado, let me delve straight to the point.
The major fundamental flaw in the charge sheet is that a crucial and necessary witness is not included namely Obinna Oparaku Akuwudike.
Recall that in my previous letter I cited different case law to establish the principle that any right-minded DPP is guided by OVER-RIDING PUBLIC INTEREST in the decision to initiate or terminate prosecution. This principle of OVER-RIDING PUBLIC INTEREST also applies in the choice of prosecution witnesses.
In other to be seen as doing justice in the interest of OVER-RIDING PUBLIC INTEREST, the DPP ought to include as prosecution witnesses persons that can shed light on Senator Natasha’s side of the story and there is no other better person than Obinna Oparaku Akuwudike.
Obinna Oparaku Akuwudike is a witness that is essential to prove the allegation that Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan uttered statements that are injurious to the reputation of the Senate President, His Excellency Godswill Obot Akpabio-GOA.
It is reported by Vanguard newspaper of 22nd May 2025, that “a journalist and media activist, Maazi Obinna Oparaku Akuwudike, has been arrested by the Nigerian police.
Obinna was reportedly arrested at 3:00 a.m. on Thursday in Owerri, Imo State, in what sources believe is connected to a recent explosive interview he granted to journalist Adeola Fayehun on her YouTube channel.
During the interview, Obinna revealed that Sandra Duru, also known as Prof Mgbeke, paid him a significant sum of money to produce defamatory content aimed at discrediting Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.” See https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vanguardngr.com/2025/05/akpabio-vs-natasha-police-arrest-whistleblower/amp/
As a senior lawyer yourself, you are no doubt familiar with the expression: “He who alleges must prove”.
You are also aware that the standard of proof required in criminal cases is beyond reasonable doubt.
In view of this, your good self and your team of lawyers and the prosecution witnesses are facing an uphill task to provide evidence to substantiate the three charges against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
As an example, I shall focus on just one of the three charges.
The prosecution (DPP) must prove that the Senate President, His Excellency Godswill Obot Akpabio-GOA, CURRENTLY enjoys a good public reputation in the first place before such a reputation or public image can be ALLEGEDLY damaged by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s utterances of 3rd April 2025 as alleged by the DPP.
The Prosecution has to provide concrete evidence to substantiate this such as a public opinion poll of the reputation of the Senate President before 3rd April 2025 and thereafter. The said poll must have been conducted by a credible organisation. It will even be more reliable if the said poll is conducted amongst the constituents of the Akwa Ibom North-West, which is the senatorial district represented by the Senate President, His Excellency Godswill Obot Akpabio-GOA.
For example, contrary to the prosecution’s claim, Senator Natasha’s allegations as allegedly uttered by Senator Natasha on 3rd April 2025 as alleged by the DPP did not prevent the immigration authorities of the Vatican City or Italy from denying Senate President visa to attend on 26th April 2025, the late Pope’s funeral.
So in the eyes of the immigration authorities of both the Vatican City and Italy (which are high ranking within the top ten industrialised countries of the world) the reputation of the Senate President did not suffer any negative consequences as a result of the 3rd April 2025 utterances of Senator Natasha as alleged by the DPP in the charges. See the report by the State House website: https://statehouse.gov.ng/press-releases/senate-president-akpabio-leads-nigerias-delegation-to-pope-francis-funeral/
Another line of argument, is that within Nigeria, the Senate President Akpabio’s reputation is at an all time low amongst right-thinking members of the public.
This low reputation is a self-inflicted consequence of Akpabio’s own words and actions.
For example, in the year 2016, the Senate President made a public statement which he published online, the statement is as follows: “If a Senator defects, he loses his seat”.
The majority of members of the public have now lost respect for Akpabio because in recent times he has turned around to endorse defection of senators. This incident is reported in Daily Post newspaper available online at: https://dailypost.ng/2025/05/23/if-a-senator-defects-he-loses-his-seat-akpabios-old-post-resurfaces-as-defections-rock-senate/
Another incident that has greatly diminished the reputation of Senate President Akpabio is the recent conviction by the Court of Appeal of a professor who is alleged to have rigged elections in his favour.
Based on this court judgement, the majority of Nigerian citizens and civil society organisations have issued a public statement calling for resignation of the Senate President. The public statement is published online at:https://dailypost.ng/2025/05/05/headline-csos-demand-senate-president-akpabios-resignation-after-electoral-fraud-conviction-of-returning-officer/
In addition, a non-profit, Non-governmental Organisation (NGO) has gone as far as filing a petition against the Senate President asking the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC) to investigate the Senate President’s action in this regard since the Senate President is also a lawyer.
In the light of this current lowest ebb of his reputation in Nigeria, it is logical to conclude that since the Senate President Akpabio no longer enjoys any reputation in the eyes (due to his own self-inflicted words and actions), it is logically impossible for Senator Natasha’s statements of 3rd April 2025 to be the direct cause of any damage to the reputation of the Senate President as alleged by the DPP.
The general rule of law of defamation and analogy is that it is impossible to damage what does not exist in the first place.
In this regard there is an unreported case suit number,THC/ABJ/CS/642/2024, in March 2025, a Federal High Court Abuja held in a judgment that prostitutes have no legal rights to reputation which can be protected by either the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 or any other laws for that matter. See the online report at: https://dailypost.ng/2025/03/12/court-dismisses-suit-seeking-to-legalize-prostitution-in-nigeria/
As Lord Denning aptly puts it, in his judgment in the case of U.A.C. vs. MacFoy (1962). You cannot put something upon nothing and expect it to stand.
On a final note, another fundamental flaw as contained in your charge sheet is that the six (6) prosecution witnesses are all TAINTED WITNESSES.
“A tainted witness is a person either an accomplice or having some purpose of his own to serve – RV ENAHORO 1964 NMLR 65; IFEJRIKA V STATE 1999 3 NWLR Pt.
In Nigerian law, a “tainted witness” is a witness whose testimony is viewed with suspicion due to a potential bias or hidden purpose, often stemming from their involvement in or connection to the case”
As you are a very senior lawyer, I would not lecture you on this.
Let me just give you an example, do a simple online search on the name of one of the prosecution witnesses, Prof. Mgbeke otherwise known as Dr. Sandra C. Duru. In one of her most recent online publications she referred to Senator Natasha as “Lie-tasha”, so the court of law would treat her evidence with not just a pinch of salt (but a truckload of bags of salt) because she definitely has an axe to grind against Senator Natasha!!!
On the website of the Nigerian Police, it is clearly stated that the major duty of the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Monitoring Unit, is as follows:
“focuses on internal oversight and accountability. This unit is responsible for monitoring the performance of police officers, addressing complaints of misconduct, and ensuring adherence to ethical standards within the force. The current IGP, Kayode Egbetokun, has emphasized the importance of this unit in maintaining public trust and combating corruption.”.
From the foregoing, it is apparent that the two police officers whom you as DPP have listed as prosecution witnesses are completely inappropriate and tainted witnesses because this is not a case of internal affairs investigation of accusations against police officers.
It raises a lot of suscipions in the minds of any right-thinking persons and confirms the fears voiced by Senator Natasha that this prosecution is a witch-hunt considering that her own previous petition submitted to the Nigerian Police authorities was never investigated talk less of prosecuting the persons that she alleged were threatening her life and assassinating her character on the internet and social media.
At this point, I rest my case!!!
Yours faithfully,
Dr. Tonye Clinton Jaja,
24th May 2025.
