NATASHA'S INTEMPERATE OUTBURST

NATASHA'S INTEMPERATE OUTBURST 

From Thursday, February 20, the social and  mainstream media have been abuzz with a trending story of an abberant behaviour by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan who decided to create a needles drama on the floor of the Red Chamber alleging  marginalization and bullying on  grounds of gender and using the pretext ostensibly to divert  attention from her moral deficiency of the   core values  of discipline and responsibility that often lead her into subversive attitude as was exhibited  in the shameful melodrama she enacted recently among others  on the floor of  that hallowed Chamber.

That Senator Natasha Akpoti is a beautiful woman is a fact that surpasses dispute. But  beauty is a combination of qualities. When it is at variance with these qualities especially character, a moral dissonance ensues and erodes the value of such considered aesthetics. Beauty is therefore a superficial consideration and insignificant if it is not deep enough to breed character.  It becomes mere cosmetic and bereft of value. Natasha has  consistently skewed public  opinion to view  her as merely possessing beauty that lacks depth, nay character. Many believe that it is that lack that railroads her into regular hysteria and belligerence. In June last year, she stirred up these  deficiencies and  grabbed  inelegant headlines.  She made a huge din  out of a minor incident and unwittingly hoisted the  Senate  on the throes of disrepute. It took the humility of the President of the Senate to publicly apologize to her and  save the  Senate from institutional erosion. It was the archetypal Natasha Akpoti on display.

On Thursday the same self styled "goddess" of the Senate,  Natasha who chooses to garb herself as an Arab queen returned to the familiar road of controversial melodrama over an elementary matter that she ought to know better. But since she has chosen periodic altercation as a way of life, even a solemn  exercise as serving a holy communion could still have provided her the ammunition to launch her tirade against any constituted authority.

The matter which gave  impetuosity  to her  recent aberrant behaviour is simple , straight and succinctly captured in the Senate Standing Order 2023 (as amended). The Senate as any responsible institution is guided by operational rules.  These rules are contained in the Standing Order which all senators have and which Natasha  quoted albeit dubiously to invoke the rights and privileges that should protect her  after bringing the institution of the Senate to disrepute with her indiscretion. In that document, Order 6, Rule 1 vests in the leadership of the Senate the prerogative to assign seats to senators. The same Order 6, Rule 2 asserts that you cannot speak until you are on the seat assigned to you. This parliamentary rule is a known given.  And seat adjustments are done without prior notice because it is deemed that no seat is wholly owned by any legislator.  

Owing to the defection of two senators to the ruling party recently, there was a need  for seat adjustments in consonance with established parameters. The adjustments were done and other senators adhered except Senator Natasha for whatever reason. When she wanted to speak from a seat not assigned her, the Chief Whip, Senator Tahir Munguno,  who exercised the authority of the President of the Senate in the  seat adjustments raised a Point of Order drawing the attention of the Senate to the fact  that Natasha had  flouted  the rule of the Senate. What the President of the Senate did in sustaining the Point of Order was to  protect the highest law making organ in the country from abuse,  whims and caprices of individuals. 

I am at a loss as to what  choice the Senate President had more than the protection of an institution that is critical to the survival of democracy. Senator Natasha has alleged bullying and marginalization. She has alleged that she was assigned a seat that has little visibility. The question is, is this seat outside the semi-circular seating arrangement of the  chamber? Has it always been occupied or not ? Has Natasha ever heard of the slogan, "obey before complaining ?" And the chamber by their operational modus  is where that precept should be  applied stricto sensu. Would Akpabio rather have looked the other way while Natasha bullied everyone else including the Nation?

Senator Sunday Karimi, Chairman, Committee on   Senate Services who is also from Kogi State  shared his unsavoury experience in the hands of  Senator Natasha that same morning . He recounted how she shouted at him using uncharitable words adding that only his  upbringing restrained him from reacting. Karimi alleged that she bullied him and breached his rights and privileges.

But Natasha has gone around to paint a picture of persecution whereas she is the real tormentor . It is a reverse psychology where the tormentor plays the victim while unleashing pain and agony on the real victims. In the crisis that ensued in June last year , it is said that Senator Natasha recruited a horde of cyberstalkers to weave  fabricated narratives that could defame the Senate President.  This time around, she is trying to use the popular Brekete Family Programme to attract sympathy and earn cheap popularity using the populist theory. In her narration to the host, she was completely economical with the truth. She said that she started shouting when her suspension was being read out. No such such thing happened. Her ranting session was not occasioned by any suggestion of suspension. She ranted ceaselessly as a habit despite the collective entreaties of her colleague senators. She railed at Akpabio with venomous invectives training her fingers at him. It was a wanton demonstration of insolence and insubordination. Yet she excluded all of these from her narrative to Brekete Family. She lied egregiously. It was why the host was misled into saying "the masses are with you". Brekete Family  advocates for a society that is anchored on justice and the rule of law. I am not sure it would condone those who are not law abiding. Senator Natasha lacks the discipline to comply with simple rules . It would be a contradiction if the Brekete Family supports lawlessness as overtly represented by Senator Natasha.

The people of Kogi State should hence watch who they send to the centre to represent them. Many of them have come as melodramatic personas exhibiting more cantankerous behaviour than the value they are expected to add to national debates and legislation. Wisdom should dictate to the likes of Natasha that she stands to gain more for her people in an atmosphere of peace than in a toxic environment fueled by hate, animosity and antagonism.

Michael Yekini writes from Lokoja