The political dispute involving Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Kogi Central Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has taken another turn following fresh allegations made by United States-based activist Sandra Duru, popularly known as Prof Mgbeke.
Duru released a nine-minute audio recording on social media on Friday, with excerpts circulating widely online the following day. In the recording, the activist made a new claim concerning her alleged dealings with both Akpabio and Akpoti-Uduaghan.
According to the latest account, Duru alleged that Akpabio had previously engaged her to campaign against Akpoti-Uduaghan. The claim represents a significant change from an earlier version of events presented by the activist.
In May 2025, Duru had alleged that Akpoti-Uduaghan approached her and offered N200m to make accusations against Akpabio. The Kogi senator rejected that claim at the time, describing it as false and manipulated.
Duru’s latest recording now presents a different account of her relationship with the Senate President. She described the audio as an initial disclosure and suggested that additional information about her dealings with the politicians could emerge.
The activist also circulated portions of what she claimed were conversations involving Akpabio. One of the excerpts allegedly contained discussions about political developments involving former Delta State Governor Ifeanyi Okowa and Senator Ned Nwoko.
In another portion, a male voice identified by Duru as Akpabio reportedly discussed Okowa’s decision to join the All Progressives Congress. However, the authenticity of the recording, the identities of the voices and the broader circumstances surrounding the alleged conversation had not been independently established at the time of the report.
Neither Akpabio nor Akpoti-Uduaghan had publicly responded to the latest claims when the report was filed.
Attempts to obtain a reaction from Akpabio’s media aide, Eseme Eyiboh, were unsuccessful. Calls and messages seeking clarification reportedly received no response.
The senator’s camp also declined to comment. Her media aide, Mike Idoko, said the team was not interested in responding to the latest development.
The new controversy is connected to a dispute that has continued for more than a year and has involved allegations, counter-allegations and legal proceedings.
Duru became involved in the matter in 2025 after accusing Akpoti-Uduaghan of offering her money to make damaging claims against Akpabio. The senator denied the allegations and maintained that the activist’s account was untrue.
The disagreement subsequently moved into the legal arena. Akpoti-Uduaghan petitioned the Inspector-General of Police over allegations involving Akpabio and Duru, with her legal representatives describing the situation as part of a coordinated effort against her.
There was also a court intervention. In January 2026, a Federal Capital Territory High Court reportedly issued an interim order restraining Duru and Meta Platforms from further circulating material considered defamatory against Akpoti-Uduaghan.
The order followed an application by the senator seeking protection against what she described as continuing attacks on her reputation. The court subsequently directed Duru to stop publishing or distributing allegedly defamatory material concerning the senator pending the determination of the substantive case. Meta was also directed to take down or restrict access to the publications covered by the order.
The latest audio has therefore reopened public discussion surrounding the long-running dispute.
For now, however, the allegations contained in the recording remain unverified. No independent confirmation has been provided establishing the identity of the voices or proving that the conversations occurred in the circumstances alleged by Duru.
The silence from the two principal political figures also means that their positions on the latest claims remain unclear.
The development is likely to attract further attention as the existing legal disputes surrounding Akpabio, Akpoti-Uduaghan and Duru continue.
Until the recording is independently authenticated and the parties involved provide substantive responses, the claims contained in the latest audio remain allegations rather than established facts.
