A chieftain of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Kenneth Okonkwo, has refused to retract allegations he made concerning the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC) primary election process, insisting that his comments were based on complaints received from party aspirants and members.
The dispute began after Okonkwo, during an appearance on Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily, alleged that some NDC aspirants were asked to pay money in exchange for party tickets.
Following the interview, NDC presidential candidate, Peter Obi, through his lawyer, Chief Alex Ejesieme (SAN), issued a pre-action notice demanding a public retraction, apology, and N5 billion in damages. Obi described the claims as false, malicious and damaging to his reputation.
However, in a response dated June 16 and filed through his legal representatives, Supreme God Chambers, Okonkwo maintained that he had not defamed the former Anambra State governor.
According to the letter, Okonkwo’s statements were based on information provided by several aspirants and party members who allegedly raised concerns about the conduct of the party’s nomination process.
His lawyers stated that one of the complainants, Obunike Ohaegbu, an NDC House of Representatives aspirant from Anambra State, approached Okonkwo seeking assistance in recovering N10 million he allegedly paid during the nomination process.
The response claimed that Ohaegbu believed the payment guaranteed him the party ticket but was later informed that he would have to participate in direct primaries.
Okonkwo’s legal team further alleged that Ohaegbu held Obi responsible for the situation and encouraged the politician to draw public attention to the matter.
The letter also referenced complaints allegedly made by other aspirants, including OAU Onyema, a former senatorial hopeful in Enugu State, who reportedly expressed dissatisfaction with the nomination process.
According to the lawyers, several aspirants paid various fees during screening and nomination exercises but later felt misled by party officials.
They argued that Okonkwo was acting within his rights as a lawyer, politician and public affairs commentator by speaking on issues brought to his attention.
“Our client stands by every statement he made during the Channels Television interview,” the letter stated.
“The objective was to expose what he believes are practices such as transactional politics, ticket racketeering, extortion of aspirants, misleading representations and undue pressure within the political process.”
The lawyers further accused Obi’s camp of publishing Okonkwo’s personal telephone number after the pre-action notice became public.
They described the action as a violation of privacy, claiming it exposed their client to harassment, threats and unwanted attacks.
With both sides standing their ground, the dispute appears headed for a legal showdown unless an out-of-court resolution is reached.
