Akpabio’s leadership not projecting Senate in positive light — Ojudu
Senator Babafemi Ojudu, a chieftain of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), previously served as Special Adviser on Political Matters to former Vice President Yemi Osinbajo. In this interview with Daily Trust, the journalist-turned-Ekiti Central-senator assesses the prospects of the opposition leaders’ recently formed coalition, the National Assembly’s response to President Bola Tinubu’s state of emergency declaration for Rivers State, and other key issues.
With the ongoing realignments among opposition parties, do you think a coalition strong enough to challenge the ruling party in 2027 is feasible, or are we likely to see a repeat of fragmented opposition efforts?
It’s still early days to predict the full shape of 2027, but one thing is clear; for our democracy to grow, Nigeria needs strong, viable political parties across the spectrum. A dominant single-party system does not serve the best interest of democratic development. I am a proud member of the APC, but I believe in the importance of robust competition, as it keeps everyone on their toes. I support efforts to strengthen smaller parties and coalitions—not because I want the APC defeated, but because democracy thrives when there is balance, ideas clash constructively, and the people have real choices.
Given your experience in political strategy, what do you think are the key mistakes opposition parties should avoid if they are serious about unseating the incumbent administration?
The key error would be placing personal ambition above collective purpose. If opposition parties are serious, they must shelve individual aspirations, build consensus, and develop a people-oriented movement grounded in vision, not emotion or opportunism. Without this, they risk becoming flash-in-the-pan ventures that fizzle out before the real contest begins.
The president’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers was met with strong resistance, including from you. Yet the National Assembly swiftly ratified it with a voice vote. This has fuelled perceptions that the National Assembly is merely a rubber stamp for the executive. Do you think this criticism is justified?
It’s an unfortunate perception—and in many respects, a justified one. A healthy democracy depends on the checks and balances among institutions, especially between the legislature and the executive. When a sensitive matter like a state of emergency is waved through without serious debate or scrutiny, it weakens the credibility of our democratic institutions. We must strengthen the National Assembly to act as an independent arm, even while being constructive partners with the executive.
Some lawmakers initially opposed the declaration but later fell in line, leading to speculations of political pressure or financial incentives at play. You have been at both the legislative and executive branches. What do you think played out, and how does this affect public trust in the legislature’s independence?
It speaks to the quality and orientation of individuals in the chambers. If legislators are not grounded in the values and ideology of their parties, or committed to the people who elected them, they can be easily swayed. Look at Bauchi State, for example—three Senators from the opposition PDP, with a governor who vocally opposed the emergency, yet none of them took a principled stand. That raises legitimate questions. We must work to restore public trust by promoting accountability and principled representation.
Several lawmakers have since distanced themselves from the ratification of the Rivers State emergency. However, apart from Senator Seriake Dickson’s protest, there were no dissenting voices during the vote. Does this post-ratification dissociation suggest an afterthought—or does it point to deeper issues in the legislature?
It’s exactly what you’ve called it—an afterthought. The time to speak and stand was during the proceedings, not after the fact. This signals either fear, confusion, or a troubling lack of conviction among our lawmakers.
In recent times, the Senate has been accused of silencing dissent, as seen in the cases of Senators Abdul Ningi and Mohammed Ali Ndume. Could this have influenced what transpired during the emergency vote, or was it simply a matter of inducement, as some have alleged?
I don’t have evidence to support the claim of inducement, so I won’t speculate. What I can say is that standards have dropped significantly. Today, it’s difficult to distinguish ruling party members from opposition members—they’ve all melted into one. That should never be the case in a functioning democracy.
With growing concerns about legislative independence, what concrete steps should be taken to ensure that the National Assembly is not seen as an extension of the executive but as a true representative of the people?
It comes down to building stronger political parties with coherent ideologies and firm internal discipline. When a party is strong, its elected members will have clear policy positions to defend and credible leaders to hold them accountable. Without that, lawmakers become lone actors, swayed by short-term calculations instead of long-term ideals. The institutional independence of the legislature must also be guaranteed—through reforms, orientation, and a renewed sense of duty to the public.
The heated exchange between Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has sparked debates about gender, power, and political culture in the Senate. What’s your take on how this reflects the state of Nigeria’s democracy?
It highlights the immaturity of our democratic culture and the need to deepen respect, civility, and decorum in our legislative spaces. The Senate should be a model of thoughtful debate, not a theatre of personal ego clashes. That incident was unfortunate, and it tells us we still have a long way to go in building institutions that reflect the values we claim to uphold.
Do you think the Senate under Akpabio’s leadership is effectively fulfilling its constitutional role, or is it being overshadowed by internal rivalries and executive influence?
As a committed APC member, I say this with all due respect: Akpabio’s leadership has not projected the Senate in a positive light. The Senate is a hallowed chamber that requires sobriety, impartiality, and a deep understanding of democratic responsibilities. When history is written, this period may reflect poorly on how we handled legislative independence. That’s a burden we must all bear and a call to do better moving forward—for the sake of our party and the country.
You’ve criticised Akpabio’s leadership, and observers have noted how the presidency often has its way in the Senate—except in rare cases like the proposed Niger intervention and the tax reform bills. Do you think this reflects state capture under President Tinubu’s administration?
I would attribute this to the weakness of the opposition; not necessarily to state capture. In a healthy parliamentary democracy, the opposition serves as a counterbalance—guiding debates and protecting democratic norms. Unfortunately, what we have today is a vacuum. Many opposition lawmakers operate as lone actors, without a unified platform or clear ideological guidance. That’s the bigger danger to our democracy.
With increasing voter dissatisfaction and economic challenges, do you think Nigerians are becoming more politically aware and demanding accountability, or is voter apathy still a major problem?
Unfortunately, poverty, disillusionment, and lack of civic education have made many Nigerians passive. The critical mass needed to hold leaders accountable is yet to emerge in full force. People feel trapped in survival mode. But I believe awareness is growing—especially among the youth. What we need is consistent civic engagement, grassroots education, and platforms that empower citizens to speak up and act constructively.
Political godfatherism remains a dominant force in Nigerian politics. The recent developments in Lagos and Rivers have reignited this conversation. Looking at the push by the youth in 2023 through the Obidient Movement, do you think 2027 will see a generational shift in leadership, or will the old power structures remain firmly in place?
I’m not overly optimistic yet. Many of those elected under the Labour Party umbrella in 2023 came in by a twist of fate rather than through a coherent strategy or ideology. Sadly, we’ve not seen much impact from them in the legislature. Some have defected to the ruling party or become silent. If the energy of 2023 is to be sustained and converted into lasting change, then the youth must organize better, build solid platforms, and stay engaged beyond election cycles. Otherwise, the status quo will remain.
