The Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice has said that the defamation charges it filed against Sen. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan are valid.
The AGF claims her actions against Senate President Godswill Akpabio and former Kogi Gov. Yahaya Bello contravened the penal code.
The AGF said this in response to Akpoti-Uduaghan’s preliminary objection to three counts bordering on injurious falsehood and defamation filed against her.
The charges stemmed from complaints by Akpabio and Bello, referencing the senator’s allegation of an assassination attempt.
Persecondnews recalls that Sen. Akpoti-Uduaghan was arraigned on June 19 before the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Maitama, Abuja, where she pleaded not guilty.
She subsequently filed a preliminary objection, urging the court to dismiss the charges against her.
On Monday, October 27, Justice Chizoba Oji adjourned till December 1 to hear the preliminary objection after the prosecuting counsel, Mr. David Kaswe, informed the court that although the case was scheduled for the hearing of the objection, the prosecution had been unable to serve its response on the defence.
In a counter-affidavit filed by the AGF’s office, the prosecution urged the court to reject Akpoti-Uduaghan’s preliminary objection.
The prosecution stated: “The three counts were preferred against the defendant pursuant to the Penal Code Law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and in the bona fide exercise of the prosecutorial powers of the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation, as guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), and in the best interest of justice.
“The actions and conduct of the defendant/applicant contravened the Penal Code Law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“The criminal charge against the defendant arose from the comprehensive and conclusive investigation of the case, including all petitions and parties involved, by the Nigeria Police Force.
“All the petitions filed by the defendant were duly investigated, and charges were filed at the FCT High Court against her colleague, a senator.
“The Office of the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation filed the criminal charge against the defendant after due consideration of the public interest, the interest of justice, and the need to prevent abuse of legal process.
“The charge against the defendant is consistent with extant laws and does not constitute an abuse of the legal or prosecutorial powers of the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation.”
In the charge marked FCT/HC/CR/297/25, Akpoti-Uduaghan was accused of making harmful imputations that she allegedly knew would damage the reputation of Akpabio by claiming that he conspired with former governor Bello to kill her.
She was further accused of making similar imputations against Bello and another against Akpabio, allegedly linking him to the death of Miss Iniobong Umoren.
At the last sitting of the court on September 23, the defence counsel, Mr. Ehighioge West-Idahosa(SAN), informed the court that the defendant had filed a notice of preliminary objection, arguing that the Office of the Attorney-General had abused its prosecutorial powers.
According to him, the objection did not contest the substance of the charges but challenged their validity, describing it as a “threshold jurisdictional matter.”
He added that the preliminary objection had been served on the AGF’s office on September 18, but no response had been received.
At Monday’s resumed hearing, Kaswe explained to the court that the address where the prosecution’s counter-affidavit was served did not belong to any of the defence counsel, and he requested a short adjournment to enable proper service.
“It would not be fair for the prosecution to insist that the case proceed when the defence team has indicated its intention to respond to our counter,” Kaswe said. “We are, therefore, asking for a short adjournment to enable us to effect proper service.”
Responding, West-Idahosa confirmed that the defence had not received the prosecution’s response, noting that none of the defendant’s lawyers had been served.
“The prosecution’s counter was not served on any of the defence lawyers. We intend to respond when we are properly served, as we have additional evidence to file,” the senior advocate stated.
He also appealed to the court to grant a long adjournment, explaining that members of the defence team planned to attend this year’s International Bar Association Conference in Canada.
After listening to both parties, Justice Oji adjourned the hearing of the preliminary objection until December 1.
Leave a comment