By Prosper Mene
The Court of Appeal in Abuja has reserved its judgment on intertwined appeals filed by Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Kogi Central Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. The case, which revolves around the legality of Akpoti-Uduaghan’s controversial six-month suspension from the Senate, highlights a broader debate over the boundaries between parliamentary autonomy and judicial oversight.
The appeals comes from a July 4, 2025, ruling by Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, which declared Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension “unconstitutional, excessive, and a violation of her constituents’ right to representation.” The suspension, imposed earlier in 2025 following a heated plenary session dispute over seating arrangements and allegations of misconduct, barred the senator from legislative duties and committee assignments. Justice Nyako ordered her immediate reinstatement, a decision that prompted swift backlash from Senate leadership.
Akpabio, representing Akwa Ibom North-West, filed a main appeal and cross-appeal challenging the high court’s jurisdiction. His legal team, led by Senior Advocates Kehinde Ogunwumiju and Eko Ejembi Eko, argued that the matter falls squarely within the “internal affairs” of the National Assembly, shielded from judicial interference under Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act. “The Senate’s disciplinary actions, including suspensions, are parliamentary prerogatives not subject to external review,” Ogunwumiju contended during Friday’s hearing, describing the lower court’s ruling as a “gross miscarriage of justice” that intrudes on legislative independence.
In a notice of cross-appeal dated July 11, 2025, Akpabio sought to nullify the entire judgment, urging the appellate court to dismiss Akpoti-Uduaghan’s originating suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025) for procedural irregularities, including duplicated reliefs and failure to exhaust internal Senate remedies like the Committee on Ethics and Privileges. One cross-appeal was withdrawn during proceedings, as Akpoti-Uduaghan had already resumed her duties post-reinstatement, rendering it moot.
Akpoti-Uduaghan, a vocal advocate for women’s rights and development in Kogi State, countered with her own appeal against aspects of the high court’s decision, particularly a N5 million fine imposed for a satirical Facebook post deemed contemptuous. Represented by her counsel, she maintained that the suspension was politically motivated and disproportionate, depriving her constituents of effective representation. “This is not just about one senator; it’s about protecting the democratic voice of millions,” her team argued, emphasizing that the Senate’s actions bypassed due process and fair hearing principles enshrined in the constitution.
A three-member panel of justices, after adopting written addresses and hearing oral arguments from both sides, reserved judgment without specifying a delivery date. The court will notify parties when the ruling is ready, potentially setting a precedent on the extent to which courts can intervene in legislative discipline.
The dispute traces back to a fractious Senate session in early 2025, where Akpoti-Uduaghan accused leadership of favoritism in seating allocationsโa claim that escalated into misconduct allegations. Her subsequent suit sought to halt a Senate probe into the matter, but the chamber proceeded with the suspension amid accusations of undermining institutional authority. Supporters of Akpoti-Uduaghan, including civil society groups, have hailed the high court’s intervention as a safeguard against executive overreach in the legislature, while Senate allies decry it as an erosion of parliamentary sovereignty.
