A Tale of Two Infamous Princess: Princess Pat Akpabio and Princess God’owns Udoito

A Tale of Two Infamous Princess: Princess Pat Akpabio and Princess God’owns Udoito

By Clement Warrie

The public’s forceful rejection and condemnation following the social media insults on the office of the governor of Akwa Ibom State, by two daughters of the soil, Princess Pat Akpabio and Princess God’owns Udoito, has restored my faith in our value system. It is a declaration that while a few may be fueled by malice, bitterness, and anger, the majority still stand as a bulwark against our society’s descent into a Fuji House of Commotion.

I feel greatly compelled to join in condemning Princess Pat Akpabio upon stumbling on the now viral report by one Ukeme Peters, (see links here https://www.nairaland.com/8511289/must-read-pat-akpabio-princess#136667845) condemning Pat Akpabio’s incessant insults on the person of Governor Umo Eno. Much as I disagree with the language and tone of his now viral rebuke, (which I find needlessly abrasive) I believe the report warrants reference for the purposes of this rejoinder.

It is important to note that the actions of the Princesses have crossed the lines of political disagreement; they represent a fundamental erosion of civic responsibility and public decency. While the right to criticize is a cornerstone of any democracy, it is not a license for character assassination. The office of the Governor of Akwa Ibom State, irrespective of its occupant, is a symbol of the collective will and sovereignty of the people of Akwa Ibom State. To constantly malign and denigrate this office is not to attack one man, but to spit upon the very institution that represents the state’s dignity and order.

This raises a profound moral question: where does one draw the line between free speech and destructive malice? While the two Princesses, by virtue of their titles, (regardless of titles authenticity) should hold a position of influence, it does not bestow on then the right to be seen as a public nuisance.
Therefore, their choice to weaponize language, grievances to insults, belittle and provoke is a moral failure. It replaces the pursuit of truth with the propagation of venom, and in doing so, they sacrifice their own credibility on the altar of bitterness. The moral imperative is not to remain silent in the face of error, but to challenge it with facts and reason, presented with a respect for the shared humanity of one’s opponent.

Beyond morality, we must consider our civic responsibility. Civil responsibility demands that we critique policies, question decisions, and expose wrongdoing, but it also demands that we do so in a manner that preserves the integrity of our public square, not one that turns it into a digital coliseum for gladiatorial insults. When communication is stripped of all decency, it ceases to be persuasion and becomes mere aggression, which ultimately shuts down the possibility of dialogue and understanding.

The relentless attacks deplored by the two princesses do not just target the Governor; they are insults on the people of Akwa Ibom State.

History offers a different model for dissent, one that highlights the stark contrast between malicious insult and principled defiance. Let’s consider the case of Rosa Parks in Montgomery, Alabama. Her act of civil disobedience—refusing to surrender her bus seat—was a profound and powerful criticism of the racial system. Yet, her protest was conducted with quiet dignity and resolute courage.

The tale of these two infamous Princesses and the story of Rosa Parks present us with a clear choice. One path leads to a noisy, bitter, and ultimately futile cycle of insult that degrades all involved. The other, leads to meaningful change and elevates public discourse. The condemnation they now face is not a suppression of their right to speak, but a affirmation of the public’s right to demand better. For the health of our democracy and the preservation of our collective dignity, we must choose the path of decency.