Re-on “Akpabio, bridge burner”? Lies from grave of Osama Bin Laden

By Emmanuel Nicholas

At the outset, I confess to being profoundly mortified by the author of this article, whose faculties appear so beset by intellectual jaundice that his cognitive apparatus has expunged the veracious chronicle of history from his memory, thereby rendering him intellectually bankrupt and bereft of sound comprehension.

The piece masquerades as political commentary but reads as a concoction of lies, deliberate omissions, and thinly veiled malice against Senator Godswill Akpabio and the current administration in Akwa Ibom State.

A rebuttal is necessary not to idolize any man, but to restore factual context and dismantle the sophistry that seeks to recast statesmanship as treachery.

How, pray, can Senator Godswill Akpabio be branded a bridge-burner, a man who, as Governor, transformed the Ibibio nation into the very citadel of his administration? The Secretary to the State Government, Obong Umana Okon Umanah, was the linchpin of that government, while the Commissioner for Finance and Chairman of the Inter-Ministerial and Labour Committee was the illustrious Ibibio son, Obong Bassey Albert Akpan, whom he later elevated to the Senate upon his departure from office.

How can he be accused of bridge-burning when an illustrious son of Oro, Bar. Effiong Abia served as Secretary of the Finance and General Purposes Committee (FGPC)?

How can he be so indicted when he raised young men from every nook and cranny of Akwa Ibom into the ranks of the affluent, turning obscurity into opulence? The writer of this diatribe sings a dirge from the margins, transmuting gratitude into calumny and denominating a saint a demon, when in truth, he himself is the veritable bridge-burner.

It is a matter of historical verity that Senator Akpabio ascended the echelons of power without recourse to dynastic patronage, but rather by the singular grace of Providence and the fervent approbation of a younger generation.

To contend that his elevation was exclusively the handiwork of a “community of common men,” whom he subsequently abandoned, is to indulge in a reductionist caricature that does violence to historical nuance.

Senator Akpabio stands unrivaled as the only helmsman to have governed Akwa Ibom with an unparalleled capacity for elevating young men from the nadir of penury to the pinnacle of influence. He was the Governor who flung open the portals of governance to the youth, transmuting obscurity into prominence.

Consider the exemplar of Rt. Hon. Onofiok Luke, who commenced his public service as a Special Assistant, only to ascend to membership of the House of Assembly, thereafter to its Speakership, and ultimately to election into the House of Representatives.

Another noble instance is Prince Enobong Uwa, whom he appointed Special Assistant, then Liaison Officer in Abuja, subsequently Commissioner, and now Secretary to the Akwa Ibom State Government.

Indeed, one would be hard-pressed to identify a single young actor in the corridors of power whose rise was not, in some measure, catalyzed by Akpabio’s patronage?

From Sir Victor Antai to Obong Paul Ekpo, whom he appointed Commissioner, later facilitated to make history as the first to hold the office of State Party Chairman twice, and who now serves in the House of Representatives.

Rt. Hon. Aniekan Umanah is a veritable protégé of his mentorship, appointed Commissioner under his administration and subsequently elected to the House of Representatives.

He elevated Emmanuel Ukoete from PDP youth Leader to the post of Special Assistant and later served as a member of the House of Representatives for two consecutive terms spanning eight years.

Rt. Hon. Ekerete Ekpeyong, having served as his Personal Assistant, was later entrusted with the chairmanship of Uyo Local Government Area, while Isat Kenneth Okon, once his Special Assistant, was elevated before the end of his tenure to the chairmanship of Etinan.

The roll call of such elevations is, indeed, interminable, and one would be challenged to name a single young person in the state today whose political and economic ascendance is not traceable, in whole or in part, to Akpabio’s largesse.

The plot to discredit his Uncommon Transformation is equally baseless. Akpabio’s administration institutionalized an epochal paradigm that delivered four thousand kilometers of roads, the Godswill Akpabio International Stadium, a new Government House and Banquet Hall, over two thousand classrooms in public schools, the completion of Victor Attah International Airport, an e-Library, specialty hospitals, fifteen general and cottage hospitals, free and compulsory education, and sweeping civil service reforms that redounded to the benefit of a populace far beyond the original political coterie.

To accuse him of having “picked them from the gutter” only to deny them succession is manifestly disingenuous.

The record shows that Akpabio enthroned almost all his foot soldiers of 2007, raising them from one office to a higher one. How then can such a man be called a bridge-burner?

The accusation that he imposed Deacon Udom Emmanuel and rejected those who stood by him reveals the level of the writer’s intellectual indolence.

The choice of Deacon Udom Emmanuel in 2015 was not a rejection of the common man but a strategic pivot toward technocratic governance at a time when Akwa Ibom required financial prudence and industrialization.

Udom’s tenure attracted investments, sustained free education, and stabilized the state’s finances in the aftermath of the oil downturn.

During his stewardship, no fewer than twelve industrial enterprises were brought into being, among them Kings Flour Mill, Jubilee Syringe, St. Gabriel Coconut Refinery, BUA Petrochemical Refinery, and Metering Solutions Company.

This industrial renaissance was complemented by the construction of over two thousand seven hundred kilometers of roads, the erection of the twenty-two-storey edifice now known as the Ufom Emmanuel Tower, the establishment of Ibom Air, and a plethora of other monumental infrastructural advancements.

If the “common man principle” meant electing only those from the 2007 trenches, then democracy would be reduced to a guild, not a republic, for the essence of democracy is its ability to renew itself, and renewal sometimes demands new hands.

The allegation that Akpabio monopolized access to the Presidency to deny others is equally untenable. During the Jonathan era, Akwa Ibom witnessed unprecedented federal presence, including the Ikot Ekpene–Aba road and numerous appointments for Akwa Ibom indigenes.

To frame coordinated political alignment as “apron string” manipulation ignores how federal systems function. No governor can serve his people effectively by encouraging centrifugalism within his own state delegation.

United we stand, divided we fall, is not mere rhetoric; it is governance logic. Loyalty to a platform is not tyranny; it is coherence.

At no point during his tenure did Senator Akpabio assume the role of a gatekeeper at Aso Rock or obstruct Akwa Ibom people from gaining access.

Consequently, the treatise under review is devoid of merit.

The claim that Akpabio unilaterally amended the Senate Standing Order 2023 to exclude senators like Hope Uzodinma and Adams Oshiomhole collapses under scrutiny.

The Standing Orders are a product of the Senate as a body, subject to motion, debate, and vote. The amendment in question was moved by the Senate Leader, Opeyemi Bamidele, and presented by Deputy Senate Leader Lola Ashiru.

It amended Orders 4 and Orders 5 of the Standing Orders 2023. Order 4 established a ranking hierarchy for presiding officers, while Order 5 provided that a Senator shall not be eligible to contest as a Presiding Officer unless he has been elected and served as a Senator for at least two terms of eight years, one term of which shall immediately precede such election.

Crucially, the Senate later rescinded these amendments to Orders 2(2) and 3(1) after identifying constitutional conflicts with Section 52 of the 1999 Constitution.

The motion for rescission was sponsored by Senate Leader Opeyemi Bamidele, not Akpabio. As Presiding Officer, Akpabio does not unilaterally amend the rulebook.

To attribute the amendment to personal insecurity is to misunderstand legislative procedure and to project motive where process exists. Moreover, the assertion that Akpabio is unpopular among his colleagues is belied by his election as Senate President with sixty-three votes against forty-six, in a secret ballot of peers. That is not the outcome of a man universally despised.

The attempt to conflate President Tinubu’s national governance with Governor Umo Eno’s leadership in Akwa Ibom is both lazy and misleading. Governor Eno’s administration has been marked by reconciliation, inclusive governance, and the extension of olive branches across party lines, evidenced by his open-door policy and the fact that opposition figures have publicly acknowledged his non-vindictive approach.

Senator Akpabio neither coerced nor exerted undue influence upon the Uyo, Eket, and Ikot Ekpene Senatorial Districts to adopt him as their sole candidate; their endorsement was rendered voluntarily, of their own volition and unencumbered consent.

To label the current administration a “Pharaoh” that has truncated democratic structure is contradicted by the very fact that the APC in Akwa Ibom has a sole, uncontested gubernatorial aspirant due to consensus, not coercion.

The river metaphor employed by the writer is rhetorically potent but logically flawed. Bridges are not burnt to prevent others from crossing; they are dismantled when they lead to structural collapse, chaos, or regression.

Akpabio did not leave any common man who supported him behind; instead, he lifted them from one low office to a higher one. What is derided as “bridge burning” is often the exercise of judgment in leadership succession, party coherence, and institutional governance.

The central thesis that Akpabio and his allies are pathological bridge-burners who fear competition ignores the distinction between competitive politics and destructive factionalism.

History will judge Senator Akpabio not by the bitterness of displaced aspirants, but by the infrastructure he built, the men he raised, the policies he instituted, and the political stability he helped bequeath to Akwa Ibom and Nigeria. Truth begets hatred, but it remains true nonetheless.