Posted by Samuel on Fri 28th Nov, 2025 - tori.ng
The incident came to light following plenary, with Ndume giving his account in an interview broadcast by Channels Television.
Tension briefly spiked in the upper chamber of Nigeria’s National Assembly on Thursday following a heated verbal exchange between Senator Ali Ndume and Senate President Godswill Akpabio, prompting the veteran lawmaker to openly express his displeasure.
The incident came to light following plenary, with Ndume giving his account in an interview broadcast by Channels Television.
The senator, representing Borno North, described the encounter as “unusual” and “embarrassing,” stressing that the duty of the Senate President is to guide proceedings, not to truncate debate or curtail a senator’s contribution.
Ndume said the disruption occurred while he was delivering a submission on the Senate floor, accusing the Senate President’s mid-speech interjection of undermining parliamentary discourse.
According to him, the integrity of parliamentary discourse depends on allowing every elected member to speak without undue interference.
The Borno lawmaker also emphasised his shock, pointing to his seniority and deep experience in the chamber.
Ndume said, “The whole situation was out of the ordinary. I have been in the Senate long enough to understand how these sessions should work. The Senate President’s role is to preside, not to prevent senators from expressing themselves.”
He maintained that any issue requiring clarification should be raised after a senator concludes, not midstream.
“If anything I say needs clarification, it can be addressed afterwards, not during my speech,” he stated.
He warned that halting a senator mid-speech sends dangerous signals about floor privilege.
“When I am contributing, I should be allowed to make my point. If a topic is sensitive, that should be known from the beginning. Once the floor is given, a senator must speak freely,” he argued.
Ndume specifically criticised remarks allegedly made by Akpabio during the interruption.
He said, “It becomes troubling when I am stopped mid-speech with comments like ‘don’t go there.
“If a topic is considered sensitive, that should be made known from the beginning. Once the floor is given, I shouldn’t be told to pull back.
“If there’s an issue, then address it after I end. Not while I’m delivering.”
The senior lawmaker also warned that procedural fairness should not appear selective, especially when national issues are being debated.
“When the floor is given, it’s given. You can’t take it back halfway. That floor privilege is not selective,” he noted.