ABUJA — Professor Sandra Chidinma Duru has raised fresh questions over the handling of her petition and her reported interactions with senior government and security officials, insisting that the matter should be examined through evidence, official records and applicable laws rather than character attacks.
Duru, in a statement, challenged the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, as well as Senate President Godswill Akpabio and senior police officials over what she described as contradictions surrounding the petition and subsequent events.
She questioned why, if she was allegedly regarded as a “mentally unstable woman” or “blackmailer,” senior officials would have allegedly maintained lengthy conversations with her, discussed sensitive matters and shared documents and information with her.
Duru also claimed that she facilitated a meeting in the United Kingdom involving police officer CP Akin Fakorede, asking why such interactions would have taken place if officials considered her claims or character unworthy of engagement.
“I am coming to you lawfully and we are going to test the law of our country,” Duru said, while accusing the AGF of violating her constitutional and fundamental rights.
She, however, maintained that her objective was not to rely solely on her own assertions, but to have the evidence examined.
“I am not asking anybody to believe me simply because I said it. Listen to the recordings. Examine the documents. Follow the dates. Compare the statements with the actions and ask your own questions,” she said.
Duru questions alleged investigation into Lamisi
Duru also raised questions about what she described as the alleged discontinuation of an investigation involving Hamza Lamisi.
She asked who allegedly stopped the investigation, under whose instruction and for what reason.
According to her, Fakorede had allegedly discussed aspects of the matter with her, including what she described as behind-the-scenes developments involving the former Inspector-General of Police and Akpabio.
Duru further alleged that Fakorede told her that authorities were “avoiding” her and intended to arrest Lamisi at a time when nobody was present.
She questioned the rationale behind such an approach, asking whether law enforcement authorities should avoid individuals where allegations requiring investigation had been made.
‘My petition was my petition’
Duru also questioned the sequence of events surrounding a telephone conversation she said she had with the AGF, followed by a call to Akpabio.
According to her, Akpabio allegedly assured her that nothing was being negotiated or withdrawn, but that his own matter was withdrawn the following morning.
Duru said she had released a recording of Akpabio’s words and urged members of the public to compare what was said with subsequent events.
“My position remains unchanged: MY PETITION WAS MY PETITION,” she declared.
She maintained that Akpabio was entitled to make decisions concerning matters belonging to him but had no right, in her view, to negotiate, withdraw or interfere with a petition she regarded as independently belonging to her.
Duru raises questions over alleged threats
The professor also questioned the handling of her petition, which she said contained serious allegations concerning threats to her life.
She asked why the matter was allegedly not pursued, while repeatedly demanding explanations about the alleged investigation involving Lamisi, her interactions with senior officials, the UK meeting, documents she said were shared with her and what she described as subsequent assurances and withdrawals.
Duru further criticised what she described as attempts to discredit her by portraying her as the problem rather than addressing the substance of the issues she had raised.
She also questioned why, according to her, she was encouraged to accept compensation and “move on.”
“Move on from my own petition, my name, my rights and allegations concerning my safety and my reputation? No,” she said.
‘Let the evidence speak’
Duru said she had deliberately kept some materials private but was now prepared to make relevant recordings and documents public through lawful means.
She urged the public to examine the chronology of events and compare statements made by the various actors with subsequent actions.
“I kept the receipts for a reason,” she said.
Duru also warned against what she described as bullying, harassment, intimidation and character assassination, insisting that she would pursue the matter through lawful channels.
She said the focus should remain on the facts, evidence, recordings, documents and applicable laws.
The claims made by Duru in the statement are allegations and have not been independently established in this report.
