*As Businesswoman Accuses Him Of Coercion
The dispute between businesswoman Tracy Nicholas Ohiri and Minister of Works Senator David Umahi has taken its most dramatic turn yet, with Ohiri accusing the very activist lawyer who championed her cause — prominent human rights lawyer Marshall D. F. Abubakar — of threatening and deceiving her into recording a public apology to the minister, while Abubakar has responded with a comprehensive and scathing rebuttal revealing that Ohiri admitted she had no evidence to support any of her claims and voluntarily agreed to recant her allegations so that the multiple court cases filed against her could be terminated.
The rapidly shifting narrative has transformed what began as a debt and sexual harassment claim against a senior government minister into a three-way public dispute that has divided opinion on social media, raised serious questions about the intersection of activism, legal ethics, and political influence, and exposed the complexities of behind-the-scenes negotiations in high-profile Nigerian disputes.
The saga began last month when Ohiri publicly accused Minister Umahi of owing her approximately N250 million for items she claimed to have supplied for political campaign use during his tenure as Governor of Ebonyi State. She further alleged that the minister used the police to harass and detain her after she rejected his alleged sexual advances.
The claims sparked widespread outrage on social media, with many Nigerians rallying behind Ohiri and turning the matter into a trending national discussion. Prominent activists including Marshall Abubakar, Senator Ireti Kingibe, social media activist VeryDarkMan, former presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore, FlagboyNg, Comrade Larry, and several others rallied to Ohiri’s defence.
Minister Umahi dismissed the allegations as baseless and politically motivated, insisting that throughout his years in public office — including his tenure as Ebonyi governor and his role in party leadership — no accusations of harassment had ever been brought against him.
On Wednesday, March 18, Ohiri released a video statement formally retracting all her allegations against the minister and issuing a public apology.
In the video, Ohiri made several key admissions. She acknowledged that Umahi did not make the threats she had earlier attributed to him, clarified that she had no personal relationship with individuals she had previously referenced in her claims, and admitted there was no formally signed contract between her and the minister.
“Although the job was done and delivered to his aides, they might have used the material for campaign purposes without informing him, and without him knowing about it,” Ohiri stated.
She tendered apologies to Umahi, his family, her own family, and everyone affected by the controversy.
Just 24 hours later, on Thursday, March 19, the story took another dramatic twist. Ohiri released a new viral video in which she accused Marshall Abubakar of threatening and deceiving her into recording the apology.
Ohiri claimed that Abubakar persuaded her to make the apology video with the explicit promise that she would receive full payment for the goods she claimed to have supplied over a decade ago once the video was released. She said she later felt intimidated and misled by the process.
She formally called on the Nigerian Bar Association to investigate Abubakar’s conduct, describing his actions as unethical and coercive.
In a detailed statement released on Thursday, Abubakar described the accusations levelled against him by Ohiri as “falsehoods” and characterised his experience with his client through a stark metaphor.
“Indeed, the fact that you helped a viper out of a ditch doesn’t stop the snake from biting you,” Abubakar stated.
The lawyer asserted that he was the primary figure who rallied public support for Ohiri, mobilising what he described as “public-spirited individuals” including Senator Ireti Kingibe, Omoyele Sowore, VeryDarkMan, FlagboyNg, Comrade Larry, and several others.
He maintained that his focus was strictly to ensure that state apparatus was not deployed to gag free speech, claiming that it was only through this collective activism that Ohiri avoided a prison sentence during what he described as a “long standoff” and a “lucid ploy” to incarcerate her at all costs.
“It was on account of our continuous activism that Ms Ohiri is not in prison today,” Abubakar stated.
In the most damaging part of his rebuttal, Abubakar revealed that after rallying to Ohiri’s defence, he conducted his own thorough review of the case and found the legal foundation was entirely non-existent.
“I discovered that there was no single real evidence of any contractual agreement between her and the Minister,” Abubakar stated. “No evidence that the minister ever engaged her for any contract, and no evidence that he ever made representations to her as claimed.”
The lawyer went further, alleging that Ohiri could not produce any proof that she delivered the goods she claimed to have supplied.
“She couldn’t show a single evidence that she delivered the goods to the minister’s house as she claimed,” Abubakar stated.
He also found no evidence to support Ohiri’s allegations of threats made against her by the minister.
Abubakar revealed that Senator Ireti Kingibe attempted to mediate between Ohiri and Umahi, but the minister was adamant that he owed her nothing.
“I spoke to Senator Umahi with Mummy Ireti’s phone and he was adamant. He promised he would exhaust the full judicial process to clear his name and promised to pay her tenfold if the court ruled that he owes her; otherwise, she would face the full wrath of the law,” Abubakar recounted.
Abubakar detailed a mediation meeting that was arranged involving himself, Ohiri, her husband, Senator Kingibe, and the minister’s legal team, including a Senior Advocate identified as Mr. Abdul SAN.
The meeting ended in a stalemate, and Abubakar placed the blame squarely on Ohiri’s conduct.
“Ms Ohiri has a terrible temper and manner; she threw tantrums and insults at everyone in that meeting, thus it ended on a sour note. We all left,” Abubakar stated.
The lawyer revealed that after the meeting collapsed, Ohiri “pleaded and pleaded” for him not to abandon her, expressing deep fear over facing multiple legal cases that the minister had filed against her in Ebonyi State.
Abubakar said he advised Ohiri that under Nigerian law, defamation remains both a crime and a tortious wrong, meaning she faced serious legal exposure if her allegations could not be substantiated.
He said he presented Ohiri with two options: to explore a settlement or continue the legal battle, which would require her to provide evidence to support her claims.
In one of the most significant revelations, Abubakar was specific about the origin of a $70,000 payment made to Ohiri, identifying the source as Barrister Joseph Ekumankama, a former minister and friend of Umahi.
“It was Barrister Joseph that gave me a total sum of $70,000 to give to her,” Abubakar stated. “He informed me that it’s not compensation for any contract, neither was it admission that they were owing her, but just for the sake of peace and my mediating approach to the issue.”
Abubakar challenged any critics to verify his account with Barrister Ekumankama, whom he described as a key witness to the transaction.
This revelation contradicted the impression created by Ohiri’s coercion claims, as it showed she had received a substantial sum — approximately N112 million at current exchange rates — as part of the resolution process.
