See conditions Senate gave for Natasha’s return after court verdict

Keep up with the latest news and be part of our weekly giveaways and airtime sharing; follow our WhatsApp channel for more updates. Click to Follow us

After a Federal High Court in Abuja overturned the Senate’s six-month suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the Senate set conditions for her return.

In her ruling over the weekend, Justice Binta Nyako ruled that the Kogi Central senator’s suspension was disproportionate and ordered the Senate to reinstate her.

In March, after a confrontation with Senate President Godswill Akpabio over the seating arrangement, Akpoti-Uduaghan was suspended by the Red Chamber for six months for suspected egregious misconduct.

When Akpoti-Uduaghan claimed on national television that Akpabio was punishing her for turning down his purported sexual approaches, tensions increased.

The Senate President has subsequently refuted the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, senator’s appeal to the Senate, which claimed that Akpabio had sexually harassed her.

Akpoti-Uduaghan contested her suspension in court in the case designated FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025.

In her ruling, Justice Nyako criticized the provisions of Section 14 of the Legislative Houses, Powers & Privileges Act and Chapter Eight of the Senate Standing Rules, stating that both were excessive.

The court emphasized that neither of the two pieces of legislation specified the maximum amount of time that a sitting lawmaker might be removed from office.

Although the Senate could punish its members, Justice Nyako said that citizens should not be denied representation in the National Assembly as a result of such disciplinary measures.

She pointed out that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s 180-day suspension amounted to depriving the people of Kogi Central of meaningful participation in national governance because the Senate was only bound by the constitution to convene for 181 days during a legislative year.

“The court is not saying that the Senate lacks the power to sanction a member. However, such sanctions must not negate the constitutional right of constituents to be represented in parliament,” Justice Nyako ruled.

However, because Akpoti-Uduaghan made a sarcastic apology on her Facebook page on April 27, the court ruled her guilty of contempt.

After studying the application submitted by the third respondent, Justice Nyako determined that it was connected to the court’s suspension case. As a result, she found the plaintiff guilty of contempt.

Within seven days, the judge mandated that Akpoti-Uduaghan post an apology on her Facebook page and in two national dailies. She also assessed a N5 million fine.

Yemi Adaramodu, the Senate Spokesperson, responded to the ruling by stating that the troubled senator will not be quickly reinstated by the Red Chamber.

According to Adaramodu, the Senate’s constitutional authority to punish its members was not superseded by the court ruling.

“Which judgment are we appealing when they (the court) said the Senate has the right to discipline its erring members? The court has not ousted the Senate’s statutory right to punish any erring senator.

“It was established that the senator in question erred. The court has already told her to go and do some things, like restitution, so after the restitution, the Senate will now sit again and consider the content of that restitution, and that will inform our next line of action,” Adaramodu said.

He clarified that the Senate wouldn’t meet again to discuss the issue until Akpoti-Uduaghan had followed the court’s instructions.

“The onus is no more on us now; it is already on her doorstep to go and apologise. Once she does that, then the Senate will sit and determine how to deal with her matter.

“The first reaction now will not be from us, the court has ruled, so once she takes the step to redress and does what the court has directed her to do, then the Senate will sit and look at the content of her reaction as prescribed by the court,” Adaramodu added.

Speaking to reporters following the verdict, Senate lawyer Paul Dauda, SAN, said the decision was a partial win for the Senate, especially in regards to civil contempt related to remarks made on social media throughout the case.

Please don’t forget to “Allow the notification” so you will be the first to get our gist when we publish it. 
Drop your comment in the section below, and don’t forget to share the post.