Uyo, Akwa Ibom State — The Akwa Ibom State House of Assembly (AKHA) has firmly rejected a motion seeking to discontinue the consumption and sale of dog meat in the state, often referred to locally as “404.” The motion, sponsored by Hon. Uduak Ekpoufot, representing Etinan State Constituency, immediately collapsed during Tuesday’s plenary session (December 2, 2025) after it failed to receive the mandatory support of a seconder from any other member.
In presenting his case, Hon. Ekpoufot raised significant concerns centered on both public health and animal cruelty. He strongly condemned the inhumane methods used for slaughter, which he described as cruel and involving strangulation, blunt-force trauma, or repeated blows, causing severe animal suffering.
Furthermore, the lawmaker issued a stark warning regarding the public-health risks, cautioning that poorly processed dog meat exposes consumers to dangerous pathogens. He specifically named diseases like rabies, salmonella, and trichinella (parasites), stressing that many countries have already outlawed the practice due to these safety concerns.
Despite the detailed and impassioned presentation, the motion could not proceed past its introduction. Under the House Rules, a motion requires a seconder to be debated and considered by the Assembly. With no member rising to second the bill, the Speaker formally declared the motion rejected.
The decision means that, for the foreseeable future, Akwa Ibom State will maintain the status quo on dog-meat consumption, overriding the sponsor’s call for improved public health standards and humane animal treatment.
Public Reaction
The rejection of the motion immediately ignited a firestorm of reactions across social media platforms among Akwa Ibom residents, many of whom are staunch consumers of the delicacy.
The dominant reaction was one of sharp criticism towards the sponsoring lawmaker. Comments poured in, with many residents expressing relief and mocking the motion:
Ekikere Effiong wrote, “As How Na, we did not send him to make laws that oppose the things we like.”
Saviour Umana added, “Mbok, nothing should happen to our dog meat.”
Ubong Edem Ukor commented, “We the good people of Etinan no send am this one o!”
Joel Effiong jokingly suggested, “Etinan will forgive him as a first-timer. But if he had mentioned periwinkle, signatures would have been ready for his recall.”
Several users also questioned the legislative priority, with Iniobong Isonguyo asking, “It’s like you people don’t have anything important to discuss. Why is dog meat on the floor of the House of Assembly?” The lack of a seconder also drew humorous remarks, such as Jolly O. Edem’s observation: “No support from any member cracked me up. Members wey dey run 404?”
However, not all reactions dismissed the lawmaker’s concerns. Ifiok Itiaba noted that the health worries were valid, citing the potential for antibiotics in dog breeding to affect human consumers, high sodium levels, and mentioning that South Korea had recently passed a law to ban the dog-meat industry by 2027.
