The Senate, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, and others were directed by the Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday to present their defense in response to a lawsuit filed by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan contesting her suspension due to misconduct charges. The ruling was made during Monday’s hearings by Justice Obiora Egwuatu.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>
In a motion ex-parte filed under the filing number FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025, Akpoti-Uduaghan sued the Senate, the President of the Senate, the Clerk of the National Assembly (NASS), and Senator Neda Imasuem, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Code of Conduct.
Pending the hearing and decision of the motion on notice for an interlocutory injunction, the lawmaker requested a “order of interim injunction restraining the Senate’s committee, chaired by Imasuem, from proceeding with the purported investigation against her for alleged misconduct, which stemmed from events that occurred during plenary on February 20 and were referred by the Senate on February 25.”
On March 4, 2025, Justice Egwuatu approved Akpoti-Uduaghan’s motion, stopping the Senate from criticizing her further while the litigation was still pending. The judge also put off the case until today, and directed the “first to fourth defendants to appear within 72 hours of being served the order and show cause why an interlocutory injunction should not be granted against them, restraining them from proceeding with the purported investigation against the plaintiff (Akpoti-Uduaghan) without affording her the privileges stipulated in the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, the Senate Standing Orders 2023, and the 1999 Constitution (as amended).”
As previously reported by Nairametrics, the Nigerian Senate cited Senate rule infractions on Thursday and proceeded to ban Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months, effective March 6, 2025. By a majority vote, the Senate maintained the six-month ban, even though some senators attempted to shorten it to three months.
Her security detail will be revoked and her pay and benefits will be frozen as part of the consequences of her suspension. In court, what transpired The legal team defending Akpabio, the Senate, and the Clerk of the National Assembly asserted in open court during Monday’s resumed hearing that they had not received the plaintiff’s court filings.
Michael Numa, SAN, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s attorney, countered their assertion, stating that all parties had been properly served. The court should check the service records, Numa urged. Contrary to what some defense attorneys claimed, Justice Egwuatu later confirmed that all defendants had in fact been served.
Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, the Senate President’s attorney, asked for an adjournment after this confirmation so that the defendants might have time to formally reply to the lawsuit. Ogunwumiju’s plea for an adjournment was supported by the other members of the defense team. Justice Egwuatu’s decision mandated that the defendants submit their defense. Additionally, he ordered that prior to the next hearing date, all pertinent legal documents be filed and shared between the parties.
After that, the hearing was postponed until March 25. Background When she was requested to move her place during plenary, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan and Senate President Akpabio got into a heated argument that made headlines. During a visit to Akpabio’s house in December 2023, Akpoti-Uduaghan accused him of making unwanted approaches toward her on February 28, 2025.
She described the events in full, stating that she was in Akwa Ibom with her husband and close friends to coincidentally attend Akpabio’s birthday celebration. She claims that the visit started at Akpabio’s house in Ikot Ekpene and that they arrived at his house in Uyo at approximately 8:00 p.m. She said that the Senate President made offensive comments and gestures against her during this visit. Because of these claims, Akpoti-Uduaghan had already sued Akpabio for defamation.
Following a reshuffle brought on by opposition senators moving to the majority wing, her Senate seat was redistributed. A dispute with Akpabio resulted from her resistance to the relocation. The political environment has responded to her suspension in a variety of ways. Some lawmakers and analysts contend that the penalties are disproportionate and could create a risky precedent for suppressing dissent in the Senate, while others see the decision as an essential enforcement of legislative discipline.CONTINUE FULL READING>>>>>
