Suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has appeared before the Federal High Court in Abuja as she seeks legal redress over her suspension from the Senate, which she claims was arbitrary and politically motivated.
The case, now before Justice Binta Nyako after the initial judge, Justice Obiora Egwuatu, recused himself, features prominent legal heavyweights and raises critical constitutional questions around legislative powers, due process, and freedom of expression.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan is challenging her suspension by the upper legislative chamber over allegations of misconduct. She has joined the National Assembly, the Senate, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, and Senator Neda Imasuen—Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions—as defendants in the suit.
At Tuesday’s hearing, Jibrin Okutekpa (SAN), representing the plaintiff, informed the court that all necessary processes and evidentiary documents had been duly filed in line with earlier court directives.
In response, Paul Daudu (SAN) and Ekwo Ejembi, representing the Senate and the Senate President respectively, also confirmed their filings.
However, they raised a fresh motion accusing Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan of contempt of court over a Facebook post and a satirical open letter she published in national newspapers on March 27—allegedly mocking the Senate President and undermining the court’s interim order which bars all parties from public commentary on the matter.
The controversial letter, written in a tone some legal experts have described as “provocative,” allegedly satirized the events surrounding her suspension and referenced earlier accusations of sexual harassment she made against Senate President Akpabio—allegations which are not the subject of the current suit.
In a counter-affidavit, Akpoti-Uduaghan insists her satirical commentary was an exercise of her constitutional right to free speech, and not in breach of any standing court order. Her legal team, led by Michael Numa (SAN), argued that the Facebook post was not authored by her, nor did it directly address the core legal dispute before the court.
Meanwhile, the plaintiff also filed a separate motion accusing the Senate and its leadership of disobeying earlier court directives themselves, further intensifying the legal drama surrounding the high-profile case.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension has drawn sharp criticism from civil society groups and opposition figures, who allege it reflects a broader pattern of silencing dissenting voices within the National Assembly.
Legal analysts note that the outcome of this case could set a precedent for how far legislative bodies can go in disciplining their members, and whether such disciplinary actions can withstand judicial scrutiny.
The court adjourned for the continuation of hearings, with both parties expected to make further submissions on the alleged contempt charges and the legality of the Senator’s suspension.
