In the latest plot twist in the case involving Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and Senate President Godswill Akpabio, it turned out that the head of the Ethics Committee, Neda Imasuen, who read out the punitive statement against Akpoti-Uduaghan has a soiled professional record. Yes, the man who claimed a woman had to be punished for “bringing the Senate’s presiding office and the entire Senate into public opprobrium” is a walking bag of ethical violations, alleged fraud, and fugitive? Who could have thought?

First, I must confess a grudging admiration for Imasuen. It takes chutzpah to speak so self-righteously about a colleague whose supposed sins pale beside yours. The confidence with which he read the statement shows he has learned that the best way to deflect from the log in one’s eye is to shout the loudest at the appearance of a speck in another’s eye. We must thank him for exposing himself. If he had managed to keep his head down and his mouth shut, perhaps the can of worms spilling out of his orifices would have stayed within. It is bad enough that a character like that was elected a senator, but it is far worse that he also heads the ethics committee! Is it not too much of an irony that the sundry allegations against him were also about ethical violation—first disbarred for professional misconduct and absconded from the USA shortly after the FBI linked him to a multi-million dollar fraud? And only God knows what other scandal will come out of him if you keep shaking!

It would have been shocking if this was an isolated case, but no, the Senate that threw a fit over Akpoti-Uduaghan’s supposedly bringing them to disrepute is full of unsavoury characters like Imasuen. Even Akpabio himself has an extended record of corruption allegations that have been put in abeyance. As long as he continues to play the obsequious politics his handlers need him for, his case with the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission remains frozen. His status and influence are tied to his serving the President rather than democracy.

Imasuen’s case is, of course, also similar to that of former Speaker of the House of Representatives and current Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila. He too was a lawyer in the USA suspended (and later disbarred) for violating professional trust. The decision to permanently terminate his law license was ratified the same year he became the chief of staff. Nobody, of course, is naïve enough to wonder for even a minute why the President would keep someone so tainted that close. The reason birds of the same disreputable feather must flock together is self-evident.

Imasuen knew who he was and what he had to hide, and that was why he could proclaim that the petition accusing Akpabio of sexual harassment was “dead on arrival”. To scrutinise the conduct of the Senate’s presiding officer was to risk exposing his unflattering flank. Despite the precedents that should have instructed the committee that suspending a senator for six months is unconstitutional, they insisted on towing a discredit path. Rather than at least giving Akpoti-Uduaghan a fair hearing, he pronounced an unnecessarily harsh punishment. He is another legislative officer merely playing quid pro quo with the tools of the institution.

Now that Imasuen had no moral standing to either sit on a committee regulating the ethics of the National Assembly or pronounce judgment on a colleague, can the decision on Akpoti-Uduaghan now be rescinded? That will be the fair thing to do in the light of developments.

It will be too complicated to get him out of the Senate based on the allegations of the crime committed elsewhere (which should have been raised before his election), but someone that ethically tainted is too unfit to have the privilege of regulating the ethics of an institution like the Senate. He should be removed from leadership positions and consigned to being just a floor member. If the concerns that certain actions by lawmakers can bring the Senate to disrepute are sincere, then Imasuen should be yanked from every position of responsibility. If the Senator’s case against Akpoti-Uduaghan was truly about instituting the rules she supposedly violated and not a personal attack on her, then the Senate should immediately move to relieve Imasuen of his position and recall every decision he made as the ethics committee leader.

That brings me to another point about the misogyny that has attended the Akpoti-Uduaghan case. I never knew so many bad-mannered and uncouth men could still appear on television in 2025 until recently. Under the pretext of commenting on legislative issues, all manner of scum bags went on TV to pour their misogynistic innards into the public space. It was a shame to see.

The most irritating commenter of the misogynistic lot is Mrs Oluremi Tinubu who thinks women suffer sexual harassment because they invite it. But when she had an altercation with fellow Senator Dino Melaye in 2017, and he made some demeaning comments bordering on sexual assault about her, was it also because she failed to set boundaries with him? Women like Mrs Tinubu are the exact reason I do not believe that pushing more women to occupy leadership positions will necessarily lead to female progress in the country. Those kinds of women play identity politics just to get into places of power only for their politics to pander to oppressive norms rather than disrupt them. Their understanding of “gender empowerment” never goes beyond the rudimentary idea of gifting women money and a few household items. Advocacy for women would be better off soliciting reasonable men than relying on these “pick me” women whose ideological incoherence set the course of feminine progress back by a century.

She is not the only woman whose intervention on this issue has been more of indulging male sensibilities than offering insights. I wished the women who appeared on television to speak on this issue had spoken the way some of the men did rather than merely pander. When men have gone on television to talk about this issue, some of them said the worst things and with utmost confidence too. I wish the women who got a chance did the same. Those men could say misogynistic things on television because they have never heard their stupidity echoed back at them. Women need to speak like them for them to get it.

For instance, if a man can say a woman’s beauty is a problem for her, then women too should point out how a man’s ugliness can also be a source of his problem! Another moron, seeking to delegitimise Akpoti-Uduaghan, blatantly lied that she has had six children by six men. Akpabio also once pulled that card on television when talking about a woman. If men can be so confidently coarse, women should be able to mirror their words back to them rather than being apologetic. Talk about the number of children the man has out of wedlock; ask him if he has stopped cheating on his wife. When they go low, do not go high; kick them in the face like rabid dogs.

One simpleton said this issue of sexual harassment undermines the credibility of women in politics, and it might get to a point where they ought to be tested for emotional stability to qualify for leadership. But does Imasuen’s case also not prove that men are professionally and ethically unqualified? From Bola Tinubu to Akpabio to Gbajabiamila, there is far more evidence to prove that men are too unscrupulous, venal and felonious to be leaders. It is not women who should be examined for mental stability before they are elected; it is men who should be made to undergo a virtue test with a psychiatrist to determine if there is something about their male hormones that predisposes them to avarice.

If women talk about men the way men talk about women, it will get to a point where obtuse men will finally begin to realise how ridiculous they sound when they talk about women.

Punch