On July 14, 2025, Michael Numa (SAN), counsel for the suspended senator, formally urged the National Assembly to obey the Federal High Court’s July 4 ruling.
The legal battle involving Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and the Nigerian Senate has escalated sharply.
The court declared that the six-month suspension imposed on Akpoti-Uduaghan was unlawful and ordered her immediate recall to the Senate.
Numa’s demand comes after the Senate President appealed the ruling and is said to have blocked Akpoti-Uduaghan’s return to her legislative duties.
Court Rules Suspension “Excessive” and Unconstitutional
The suspension, which began in March, stemmed from an incident where Akpoti-Uduaghan addressed the Senate standing rather than sitting in her assigned seat.
The Senate considered this a breach of rules and suspended her for six months, effectively locking her out of parliamentary activities.
However, Justice Binta Nyako ruled the suspension excessive and unconstitutional.
She criticized the Senate’s action for depriving the people of Kogi Central proper representation.
Her judgment underscored that the six-month sanction was disproportionate, violating the Senate’s Standing Orders and fundamental constitutional rights.
Justice Nyako’s ruling, handed down in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025, explicitly invalidated the findings and recommendations of the Senate disciplinary committee that led to the suspension.
Senate’s Response: Defiance and Delay
Despite the clear judicial directive, the National Assembly has so far ignored the recall order.
The Senate’s Legal Services Directorate, under Charles Yoila, responded with a letter rejecting the claim that the court mandated the Senate or its President to reinstate Akpoti-Uduaghan.
This legal posture indicates a disturbing willingness to defy the authority of the judiciary.
The Senate holding back a legislator despite a court order raises constitutional questions about separation of powers and respect for lawful authority.
The Lawyer’s Rebuttal: “Should” Means Mandatory
In his letter to the National Assembly’s legal team, Michael Numa challenged the Senate’s interpretation of the court order.
The order states that the Senate “should” recall the senator.
Numa insists that, in this context, “should” must be understood as a mandatory directive given the broader judgment content.
He further reminded the Senate of constitutional provisions Section 287(3) of the 1999 Constitution compels all authorities to obey court decisions.
Section 318 defines “decision” to include judgments and orders, all of which must be respected.
Numa buttressed his argument by referencing a 2025 Supreme Court decision (Ecobank Ltd v Tempo Energy Ltd) emphasizing that judicial recommendations can carry binding force depending on their context.
Political Implications of the Recall Standoff
The Senate’s persistent refusal to execute the court’s order has sparked widespread criticism.
Many view this behavior as an abuse of power and an egregious disregard for democratic principles.
It exposes a dangerous willingness by lawmakers to prioritize political interests over constitutionalism and the rights of constituents.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan represents thousands in Kogi Central, yet their voice in the National Assembly remains silenced due to a political dispute.
This ongoing paralysis not only harms democracy but disenfranchises citizens.
Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Planned Return and Potential Legal Actions
Numa’s rejoinder confirmed that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan plans to resume her Senate duties by July 22, 2025.
Should the Senate maintain its obstruction, her legal team is prepared to pursue further action to enforce compliance with the court ruling.
This pending showdown will test the independence of Nigeria’s judiciary and the willingness of legislators to uphold the rule of law.
The Origin of the Suspension: A Political Powder Keg
The suspension traces back to an emotional confrontation in March.
Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan protested moves by Senate President Godswill Akpabio, accusing him of sexual harassment allegations he denies.
Following procedural dismissals of her complaints, tensions escalated when her seat was reassigned without consultation.
Her insistence on addressing the Senate from an alternative position was branded misconduct.
The outcome was her harsh suspension and exclusion from plenary and committee activities.
Court Also Penalizes Senator for Contempt
Interestingly, while quashing the suspension, the court found Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan in contempt for publicly sharing a satirical apology violating a gag order.
Justice Nyako imposed a ₦5 million fine and required her to issue a formal apology in two national newspapers.
This nuanced judgment highlights the complex clashes between free expression, court orders, and political maneuvering playing out behind the scenes.
The Senate’s Intolerance and Disproportionate Punishment
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s case reveals harsh realities about dissent and disciplinary measures in Nigeria’s legislature.
The punitive steps taken suspension without salary, denial of office access, and security withdrawal verge on political assassination of her career.
Many analysts view this as an attempt to silence a vocal critic rather than a measured disciplinary action.
The Senate’s disproportionate punishment for what began as a protest reflects a wider problem of intolerance within the political establishment.
What This Means for Nigerian Democracy
At its core, this saga questions the very health of Nigeria’s democracy.
When courts order reinstatement and elected officials refuse, the system’s checks and balances breakdown.
Constituents lose their representation, and rule of law gives way to raw political power.
Worse, such defiance encourages impunity and diminishes public trust in government institutions.
The Senate risks isolating itself from Nigerians and undermining its legitimacy.
The Call for National and International Attention
Civil society groups, political commentators, and democratic activists are watching closely.
Many have called on the National Assembly to respect judicial authority and uphold democratic norms.
International observers could also scrutinize this crisis as a barometer of Nigeria’s commitment to democracy and human rights.
A Test of Nigeria’s Judicial and Legislative Integrity
It symbolizes Nigeria’s democratic struggles between constitutional rule and political expediency.
Whether the Senate respects the court’s order or drags the nation into a constitutional crisis will influence Nigeria’s political future and the trust citizens place in their governors.
This controversy exposes the need for strong checks on legislative power, unwavering respect for judicial decisions, and political maturity to accommodate dissent within democracy.
1 Comment
e1lwsd