Fresh Natasha Akpabio leaked audio recordings have reignited the long-running dispute between the Kogi senator and Senate President Godswill Akpabio, with both clips still unverified.
ABUJA, NIGERIA — Two purported voice recordings linked to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and Senate President Godswill Akpabio have triggered fresh reactions online, after US-based activist Sandra Duru released the clips amid the politicians’ long-running dispute.
The recordings, circulated on social media, contain voices Duru and social commentator VeryDarkMan identified as those of Natasha and Akpabio. However, the authenticity of the recordings, the identities of the speakers and the full context of the conversations have not been independently established.
The development comes more than a year after the political dispute between Akpoti-Uduaghan and Akpabio escalated into allegations, counter-allegations and the senator’s suspension from the Senate.
Newstridez reviewed the latest reports, the claims surrounding the recordings and the earlier court proceedings and found that the new material has not been independently authenticated. This is important because the dispute has previously involved competing allegations over recordings and alleged media campaigns.
What The Natasha Recording Allegedly Contains
In one recording, a female voice identified by VeryDarkMan as Natasha allegedly directs a media contact to publish a story accusing Akpabio of blackmailing President Bola Tinubu against her.
According to Legit.ng’s account of VeryDarkMan’s video analysis, the voice allegedly instructed the contact to push the story before the 27th, while also indicating that it should not first appear on that person’s own platform.
VeryDarkMan said the recording surprised him as he examined the exchange. He also questioned what would happen if either side dismissed the material as AI-generated, arguing that the same standard would then have to be applied to the other recording.
That point has itself become part of the online argument, with some social media users questioning the authenticity of the female voice and others arguing that the recordings should be subjected to proper forensic examination before conclusions are drawn.
The Akpabio Recording
The second recording contains a male voice identified by Duru and other commentators as Akpabio.
In one portion reported by NPO Reports, the speaker allegedly discussed his influence over decisions involving President Tinubu, saying that what he advised the President to do would be accepted. The report quoted the speaker as saying, “By the grace of God now, it is what I say that the President will take.”
The conversation also reportedly touched on political figures including former Delta State governor Ifeanyi Okowa and Senator Ned Nwoko, as well as the wider controversy involving Akpoti-Uduaghan.
Duru has presented the recording as evidence supporting her latest allegation that Akpabio engaged her to campaign against Akpoti-Uduaghan.
That claim represents a major change from Duru’s public position in 2025.
Why The Recordings Matter
Checks by Newstridez showed that Duru’s latest account contradicts allegations she made publicly in May 2025, when she accused Akpoti-Uduaghan of offering her ₦200 million to make damaging allegations against Akpabio.
Akpoti-Uduaghan denied those allegations at the time and described Duru’s claims as untrue. Channels Television reported that the senator rejected Duru’s accusations and disputed the claims made against her.
The latest recording now presents a different narrative, with Duru alleging that Akpabio was the person who engaged her to campaign against the Kogi Central senator.
Neither account has been independently established as true by the release of an audio clip alone.
The PUNCH reported on Sunday that both Akpabio and Akpoti-Uduaghan had declined to comment on the latest allegations. The newspaper also said efforts to obtain a response from Akpabio’s media aide, Eseme Eyiboh, were unsuccessful.
Akpoti-Uduaghan’s media aide, Mike Idoko, similarly declined to comment to The PUNCH.
Natasha Responds
The situation changed on Monday after Akpoti-Uduaghan reacted to the controversy in a Facebook post.
The senator accused Akpabio’s office of sending materials to media organisations for publication and directly addressed the Senate President over the dispute. She warned that those seeking to damage her reputation would eventually face consequences.
Her response, however, did not provide an independent authentication of either recording.
The Senate President and his office had not, as at the latest reports reviewed, publicly confirmed that the voice in the second recording belongs to him or accepted the claims attributed to it.
Earlier Court Action
The latest controversy also comes against the background of an existing court dispute involving Duru and Akpoti-Uduaghan.
The PUNCH reported that a Federal Capital Territory High Court in January 2026 restrained Duru and Meta Platforms from further circulating material that the senator alleged was defamatory against her. The order followed an application by Akpoti-Uduaghan seeking protection against what she described as sustained online attacks.
According to the report, the court said the application raised a serious question to be tried and ordered that Duru be restrained from publishing or disseminating specified defamatory, scandalous, inciting or injurious material against the senator pending determination of the substantive case.
The court also directed Meta to take down or disable access to the publications covered by the order.
That legal background makes verification of the latest recordings particularly important before the allegations contained in them are treated as established facts.
VeryDarkMan Weighs In
VeryDarkMan’s reaction has helped push the recordings further into public discussion.
In a video posted on Sunday, he examined both recordings and questioned how either side could convincingly dismiss one recording as AI-generated without addressing the other recording.
He also revisited the earlier dispute between Akpoti-Uduaghan and Akpabio, including the senator’s previous allegations against the Senate President and the political fallout that followed.
However, his interpretation remains commentary rather than an independent forensic authentication of the recordings.
Mrs Natasha Akpoti first thing.
— Verydarkman (@Verydakman_) September 21, 2026
VDM does not like damage control
2: LEAVE TALK(IS THAT YOUR VOICE call OR NO? BECAUSE YOU HAVENT DENIED IT💀
3: It is easier for the ELEPHANT to go through the hole of a needle than for anyone to belive VDM has been paid,well maybe because you… pic.twitter.com/1K75C3Mana
Verydarkman reacts to viral voice recordings of Senator Natasha and senate president Godswill Akpabio pic.twitter.com/ecTdWlGaB4
— Nigeria Stories (@NigeriaStories) September 21, 2026
Data reviewed by Newstridez indicates that there are currently several separate layers to the controversy: Duru’s allegations, the purported recordings, reactions from VeryDarkMan and other social media users, the earlier 2025 allegations, and the existing court proceedings.
These should not be treated as one confirmed account of events.
The recordings may contain genuine conversations, edited material, manipulated audio or statements presented without their full context. Establishing that would require access to original files, metadata, the circumstances in which the recordings were made and, where necessary, forensic voice analysis.
A Long-Running Political Dispute
The latest development adds another chapter to the strained relationship between Akpoti-Uduaghan and Akpabio.
Their dispute became a major national political issue in 2025 after Akpoti-Uduaghan accused the Senate President of sexual harassment, an allegation Akpabio denied. The matter later resulted in her suspension from the Senate following a separate disciplinary process.
Duru subsequently became involved in the dispute through her public allegations against Akpoti-Uduaghan.
The competing narratives have since produced multiple accusations about alleged political influence, media campaigns and manipulated recordings.
The latest recordings have therefore revived questions that were already being debated publicly before the new material surfaced.
For now, however, the central issue remains verification.
An audio recording circulated online cannot, on its own, establish who made the statements, whether the recording is complete or whether the conversation has been presented in its original context.
As at the time of filing this report, the Natasha Akpabio leaked audio controversy remained unresolved, with the recordings yet to be independently authenticated. Akpoti-Uduaghan has now publicly responded to the latest controversy, while Akpabio’s office has not publicly confirmed the authenticity of the purported recording attributed to him.
Further forensic examination, direct responses from the parties and developments in the related court proceedings could provide clearer answers about the recordings and the claims surrounding them.
