ENOUGH IS ENOUGH PROFESSOR SANDRA DURU!

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH PROFESSOR SANDRA DURU!

By Princess Diana Akinmoyo

My dear sister, Prof. Sandra Duru,
There comes a point in every public disagreement when the question is no longer who can say the most damaging thing, who possesses the most recordings, or who can command the greatest attention on social media. The question becomes whether anything useful is still being served by continuing the conflict.

Professor Sandra Duru, I respectfully suggest that point has arrived. Your sustained public criticism of the President of the Senate, Senator Godswill Akpabio, has become sufficiently prolonged and personal that Nigerians are entitled to ask: what precisely did this man do to you? If there is a specific wrong, state it plainly, provide the evidence and allow the appropriate institutions to determine its merit. But if there is no identifiable personal wrong requiring legal or institutional redress, then this continuing campaign should end.

This appeal becomes more compelling because, according to the account available to us, Senator Akpabio has never physically met you. His acquaintance with you reportedly arose indirectly, after an aide drew his attention to some of your writings during the controversy involving Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. If that account is correct, it makes the intensity and persistence of the subsequent hostility difficult to understand without further explanation.

There are also troubling allegations circulating about the deterioration of the relationship which had been cordial heretofore. It has been alleged that you proposed publishing a book concerning Senator Akpabio and that relations deteriorated after the proposal did not proceed. There are claims concerning money, alleged demands for compensation, and suggestions that private telephone conversations were recorded and subsequently retained or deployed in the course of the dispute. These are grave allegations. They should not be casually repeated as established facts.

The issue of recorded conversations is particularly disturbing. Whatever the legal position governing a particular recording may be in the jurisdiction where it was made, ordinary human relationships depend upon some expectation that conversations will not subsequently become weapons in unrelated personal or political disputes. A recording must also be judged in context. Fragments of private conversation can illuminate the truth, but selective excerpts can equally distort it.

There have also been allegations that your activities were coordinated with Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. I doubt that personally because such an allegation requires evidence and should not be converted into fact merely by repetition. But the existence of these claims demonstrates why the present war of accusation is becoming increasingly unhealthy. You do not have any serious allegations against Senator Akpabio but if you had through lawful channels or refrain from escalating them.

Senator Akpabio is not beyond criticism. No public officer is. His decisions as Senate President, his political conduct and the performance of the Senate are legitimate subjects of scrutiny. But criticism of public conduct is different from a sustained assault upon personal character. The former strengthens democracy; the latter, when unsupported by evidence, can destroy reputations without advancing the public interest.

There is another consideration. Senator Akpabio reportedly chose at a critical point to discontinue or withdraw legal actions connected with the criminal defamation charges against Senator Natasha. Whatever political interpretation anyone places upon that decision, choosing de-escalation should ordinarily create an opportunity for tempers to cool rather than another battlefield. The Bible says “Blessed are the peacemakers,” and he had always been a peace maker.

Professor Duru, you have every right to disagree with Senator Akpabio. You have every right to criticise him. Where you possess evidence of wrongdoing, you have every right to publish responsibly or submit it to competent authorities. But nobody’s right to expression includes an unlimited licence to destroy another person’s reputation through allegations and insinuations that cannot be substantiated. The same principle protects you. It protects Senator Natasha. It protects Senator Akpabio. Indeed, it protects every citizen.

I have noticed that in all your campaigns, Senator Akpabio has been silent and had chosen to turn the other cheek. This is not a sign of weakness; it is a manifestation of the same spirit which led to his decision to halt the cases against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. Remember that David turned the other cheek when King Saul did everything in his power to destroy David and in the end God fought for David and the rest is history. These scriptures buttress my point (and states why you should cease and desist): “Whoso diggeth a pit shall fall therein.” — Proverbs 26:27 (KJV); and Psalm 7:15–16: “He made a pit, and digged it, and is fallen into the ditch which he made.”

Senator Akpabio also possesses the right to defend his name. In spite of his Christian disposition I hope he considers legal remedies. If publications about him cross the line from legitimate criticism into actionable defamation, harassment or other unlawful conduct, he is entitled to seek appropriate legal remedies in the relevant jurisdiction. Resorting to law is preferable to enduring an endless social-media war from someone he has not wronged in any way.

Enough damage may already have been done. There is still dignity in stopping. If there is a case, what is it? If there is a grievance, state it. If reconciliation is possible, embrace it. But if what remains is simply an escalating exchange of personal attacks, Professor Sandra Duru, please let this end.

I remain, Princess Diana Akinmoyo (Mr)