The Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled June 27, 2025, to deliver its judgment in the suit filed by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, who represents Kogi Central, over her suspension from the Senate following a disagreement with Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
Justice Binta Nyako fixed the date after the parties involved adopted their final written addresses during Tuesday’s proceedings.
Akpoti-Uduaghan approached the court seeking to restrain the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions from investigating her after a disagreement with Akpabio during a plenary session on February 20, which stemmed from a dispute over seating arrangements.
Tensions deepened when the senator, during a television appearance, accused the Senate President of sexual harassment.
The suit, numbered FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025, lists the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Senate, the Senate President, and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, Senator Nedamwen Imasuen, as the first to fourth defendants respectively.
On March 4, the court issued an interim order restraining the Senate from taking disciplinary action against Akpoti-Uduaghan. Despite this, the Senate proceeded on March 6 to suspend her for six months, citing a report by the ethics committee which accused her of gross misconduct—even though the matter was already before the court.
During an earlier sitting on April 4, Justice Nyako directed all parties to avoid granting interviews or making social media posts about the case while it was still pending.
ALSO READ
At Monday’s hearing, counsel representing the Senate and the Senate President accused Akpoti-Uduaghan of breaching that order through a Facebook post titled “Satirical Apology.” They argued that the post suggested her suspension was linked to her refusal of alleged sexual advances from Akpabio and cited a publication in PUNCH to support their claim.
In response, her lead counsel, Michael Numa (SAN), argued that the contempt allegation lacked merit, maintaining that the post was unrelated to the current suit and that the sexual harassment claim was a separate issue before another judge.
“We maintain that the satirical post is unrelated to this suit,” said Numa. “Our client has already spent 68 days outside the National Assembly. We urge the court to expedite hearing and dismiss the contempt application.”
Charles Yoiki, counsel for the first defendant (the Clerk of the Senate), contended that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the matter and asked that the case be struck out.
“We filed a motion challenging the court’s jurisdiction and asking it to strike out the suit, especially the originating process,” Yoiki stated.
Chikodiri Ojukwu (SAN), representing the Senate, and Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN), representing the Senate President, echoed the same argument. They contended that the case should be struck out due to lack of jurisdiction and that the suspension had already taken effect, thereby overtaking the substantive claims.
Ogunwumiju also urged the court to order the removal of the “Satirical Apology,” which he described as a clear violation of the court’s prior order.
Valentine Offia, who appeared for the fourth defendant, Senator Imasuen, aligned with the arguments and adopted his processes as well.
Justice Nyako adjourned the matter to June 27 for judgment, adding that she would first deliver a ruling on the contempt application before proceeding to address the preliminary objections.
She clarified that the outcome of those objections would determine whether the court would move on to consider the substantive case.
