A suit filed by suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduagha before the Federal High Court in Abuja to quash the six-month suspension the Senate slapped on her has been adjourned until June 27 for judgment.
The court session, now before Justice Binta Nyako after Justice Obiorah Egwuatu recused himself, addressed a series of motions from both the plaintiff and the defence, including allegations of contempt of court and violation of free speech rights.
Justice Nyako okayed the case for judgment after all the parties adopted their final submissions.
Cited as defendants in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025 are the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Senate, the Senate President, Mr. Godswill Akpabio, and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, Sen. Nedamwen Imasuen.
While the embattled lawmaker, through her team of lawyers led by Mr. Jubril Okutekpa (SAN), urged the court to invalidate her suspension, which she said was done in disobedience to a valid court order, the defendants challenged the court’s jurisdiction to meddle in what they termed an internal affair of the Senate.
The defendants also alleged that the plaintiff had breached the court’s April 4 order, which barred all parties from making public comments about the case.
Akpabio through his lawyer, Mr. Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN), specifically drew the court’s attention to what he described as “a satirical apology” the plaintiff tendered to him on her Facebook page.
Akpabio insisted that the apology was a mockery of the court’s order.
Meanwhile, before she adjourned the case for judgement, Justice Nyako said she would first consider the issue of contempt raised by the parties before deciding all the preliminary objections.
She stressed that Natasha’s suit raised “recondite issues of law” that would require judicial interpretation.
Persecondnews recalls that Justice Nyako took over the case following the recusal of the previous judge, Justice Egwuatu, who returned the case file on March 25 after Akpabio accused him of bias.
Prior to that, Justice Egwuatu had issued an interim order on March 4 against the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, ordering them not to proceed with the disciplinary initiated against Akpoti-Uduaghan over an allegation that she flouted legislative house rules.
He held that the disciplinary process should be suspended pending the determination of the suit brought before him by the embattled female senator.
The judge gave the defendants 72 hours to show cause why the court should not issue an interlocutory injunction to stop them from probing the plaintiff for alleged misconduct without affording her the privileges stipulated in the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the 2023 Senate Standing Order, and the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act.
The interim orders followed an ex parte application and an affidavit of urgency that the lawmaker brought before the court.
However, despite the court’s orders, the Senate Committee held its meeting and suspended the plaintiff for six months.
In a subsequent ruling, Justice Egwuatu amended the interim order he issued in favour of the plaintiff by vacating the aspect that barred the Senate from undertaking any activity during the suit’s pendency.
Not long after the orders were made, the Senate President filed a motion to query the court’s powers to interfere in the Senate’s affairs.
The Kogi state federal lawmaker approached the court after she was summoned to appear before the disciplinary committee following a faceoff with the Senate President during plenary on February 20.
While protesting the alleged arbitrary change of her seating arrangement, the lawmaker repeatedly raised a point of order to be allowed to speak, even though the Senate President had overruled her.
Irked by her conduct, the Senate President referred her case to the Ethics Committee.
In a television interview she granted on February 28, Sen. Akpoti-Uduaghan alleged that her troubles in the Senate began after she rejected unwanted advances from the Senate President.
In an ex parte application she brought before the court, the lawmaker sought an order declaring any action the committee would take within the pendency of her suit “null, void, and of no effect.”
Specifically, the court, in the interim orders it made held: “It is hereby ordered as follows: An order of this Honourable Court is made granting leave to the Plaintiff/Applicant to serve the 2nd — 4th Defendants/Respondents with the Originating Summons and all other accompanying processes in this suit by substituted means, to wit: by serving same through the 1st Defendant (Clerk of the National Assembly) or pasting same on the premises of the National Assembly and publishing same in two national dailies.
“An Order of Interim Injunction of this Honourable Court is made restraining the 2nd Defendant/Defendant’s Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Code of Conduct, headed by the 4th Defendant, from proceeding with the purported investigation against the Plaintiff/Applicant for alleged misconduct, sequel to the events that occurred at the plenary of the 2nd Defendant on February 20 2025, under the referral by the 2nd Defendant on February 25 2025, pending the hearing and determination of the Motion on Notice for interlocutory injunction.”
As well as, “An order of this Honourable Court is made directing the 1st — 4th Defendants to show cause within 72 hours upon the service of this order on them, why an order of interlocutory injunction should not be granted against them, restraining them from proceeding with the purported investigation against the Plaintiff for alleged misconduct without affording her privileges as stipulated in the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (As Amended), the Senate Standing Order 2023, and the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act.”
Leave a comment