Speaker, Rt Hon Elvert Ayambem (left) and Comrade Ogar Emmanuel Oko.
By Anietie Akpan
Recent summon of a Social Media Cntent Creator, Ejim John Ogbeche over a viral Social Media video by the Cross River State House of Assembly (CRHA) has drawn the wrath of the Civil Society group.
The House had summoned one Ogbeche, who is from Bekwara Local Government Area (LGA) to appear before it and explain his allegation that Hon Omang C. Omang (Bekwara) and other Cross River Lawmakers earn N6.8 million monthly.
The House in a release on May 28, by the Information Officer, Itam Offor, adopted the resolution following its consideration of a Matter of Urgent Public Importance presented by Hon Omang who disclosed that the said allegation was contained in a viral video published by Ogbeche, his constituent.
“On the 23rd of May 2025, l woke up to a false and malicious video publication made by one Ejim John Ogbeche whose Facebook name is Ejim Johnny Agogo a native of Ukpah (my village). The false and malicious video publication alledged that l, as a Member of the Cross River State House of Assembly, earn the sum of #6,800,000.00 as my monthly salary excluding constituency allowances and sitting allowances.” Omang stated.
Continuing, Omang stated; “the false and malicious video publication is misleading and an attempt to pitch my constituents and the general public against me and the CRS House of Assembly”.
The Bekwara Legislator further emphasized that by the video publication, the reputation of the Lawmakers have been lowered in the estimation of right-thinking members of the public.
Contributing to the Matter, the Lawmakers unanimously condemned the video publication as “outright falsehood” and an attempt to tarnish the image of the House of Assembly and it’s Members.
They stressed the need to put the records straight noting that, they neither collect constituency nor sitting allowances while their salaries, which are not anywhere close to the alledged amount, were fixed by the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission(RMAFC).
They agreed that the author of the video publication should be summoned to offer explanation as to where he got his information adding that this will serve as a deterrent to Social Media users who peddle falsehoods to instigate unsuspecting and gullible members of the public.
The Speaker of the 10th Assembly, Rt Hon Elvert Ayambem described the video publication as defamatory and capable of inciting members of the public against the Legislators, saying that despite the inflation and the general economic hardship, Lawmakers salaries, as fixed by RMARF have not been increased.
But a Social Critic, Activist and Cordinator of a Civil Society group, Rabbit Punch, Comrade Ogar Emmanuel Oko in a statement made available to Pillar Today, condemned the resolve of the House to summon Agogo following complaints from Omang that one of his constituents, Mr. Ejim Johnny Agogo made a statement he (Omang) considers defamatory to the Assembly.
He is expected to clarify the veracity of his allegation that members of the Assembly take home more than ₦6 million monthly.
Oko said, “Hon. Omang is a legal practitioner, and a few of his colleagues are lawyers. They should know better that Agogo’s statement does not constitute defamation. Even if it does, it would be ultra vires for the House to act on it, as this would amount to usurping the role of a court of competent jurisdiction in adjudicating a matter in which they are directly involved. This is against the principles of natural justice.
“According to the legal maxim nemo judex in causa sua— meaning no one should be a judge in their own cause— the Assembly should seek legal redress through appropriate judicial channels, rather than summoning a private citizen. Defamation is a civil matter. It is outside the precinct of the legislature to entertain it. The duty of the legislature is the enactment, and sometimes, promulgation of laws. It is the duty of the judiciary to decide whether or not the case is defamatory”.
He said , “to us in civil society, this action by the House is clearly aimed at intimidating and gagging dissenting voices. Such an action is reprehensible, draconian, condemnable, and repugnant— to say the least”.
Oko stated that inrecent times, it has become evidently clear that speaking or expressing contrary views on certain matters—especially those involving government officials in the Cross River State has become almost sacrilegious as there appears to be a systematic attempt to gag dissenting voices. Daring to question issues of governance is gradually becoming a taboo— a criminal offense.
The activist pointed out that he has been a victim of molestation, victimization, oppression, denial, prejudice, and other coercive measures imposed by those who sit on the pew of power and fundamentally, every citizen has a right to freedom of discussion.
“This means that he is free to say, write or publish anything he pleases so long as he does not a breach of the law. The law is only infringed if he says or publishes anything of a defamatory, seditious, blasphemous, or obscene character. If the law is not breached, no individual, whether an elected officer, or a constituted institution has the locus standi to intimidate a citizen in the guise of summoning”, he added.
