Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the embattled senator representing Kogi Central, arrived at the National Assembly Complex in Abuja with the aim to resume her legislative duties as a senator following a Federal High Court ruling that deemed her suspension unconstitutional.
The Suspension and Legal Twist
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan was suspended in March 2025 for six months over allegations of “unruly conduct” on the Senate floor—specifically, for refusing to adhere to the chamber’s seating arrangement. However, the senator has consistently maintained that her suspension was politically motivated, coming just one day after she submitted a petition accusing Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment.
Akpabio has denied the allegations, and the Senate insists the disciplinary action was unrelated to her petition. Nonetheless, the timing raised eyebrows both within and outside the legislature, with many civil society groups suggesting the move was a thinly veiled act of retaliation.
In July, the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Binta Nyako, declared the Senate’s action unconstitutional. The court ruled that suspending a senator for such a lengthy period violates Section 63 of the 1999 Constitution, which requires lawmakers to attend plenary sessions for a minimum of 181 days per legislative year. The judge also ordered the Senate to reinstate her, although she included additional conditions—namely, that the senator pay a fine of five million naira for contempt of court and issue a public apology in two national dailies and on her social media page.
Natasha and security battles
Armed with the court’s ruling, Akpoti-Uduaghan made her way to the National Assembly. But her return was halted as Security operatives blocked her convoy at the main gate, and despite an attempt to proceed on foot, she was again stopped at the inner gate of the complex.
In her statement to the media, Natasha accused the Senate leadership of defying a valid court order. She emphasized that the judgment legally restored her position and described the Senate’s refusal to allow her entry as contempt of court and unconstitutional.
“The office of the Senate President does not give me legitimacy,” she said. “My legitimacy comes from the people of Kogi who voted me in.”
She also challenged the Senate’s assertion that an appeal filed by Akpabio invalidated the court’s ruling, noting that no such appeal had yet resulted in a stay of judgment.
The Senate’s Defense
Spokesperson of the senate house, Senator Yemi Adaramodu, stated that there is no current court order explicitly mandating Natasha immediate reinstatement. It also emphasized that the senator had failed to comply with all components of the judgment, namely the payment of the fine and the required public apologies.
According to Adaramodu, “The Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria wishes to reaffirm, for the third time, that there is no subsisting court order mandating the Senate to recall Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan before the expiration of her suspension.”
Legal Perspectives on Natasha’s suspension
Legal experts have contributed their quota to the case although it seems divided as Some argue that the judiciary has the authority to intervene when legislative actions violate constitutional rights. Others, however, say that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan should not attempt to enforce a ruling she has also appealed.
Senior lawyer Ken Harries criticized the senator for what he described as a contradictory legal strategy. “How do you seek to enforce a judgment you have openly appealed against?” he asked. He further noted that the senator had not fulfilled all the conditions of the court’s judgment, questioning the legal and moral basis of her demands.
At the same time, public opinion appears to be tilting in the senator’s favor. Many Nigerians, especially in her home state of Kogi, view the Senate’s actions as politically driven and a form of institutional suppression. Human rights groups and gender advocates have also voiced concern over what they call a pattern of silencing women in positions of power.
Activist Aisha Yesufu, who also accompanied Natasha to the gates of the Assembly, condemned the Senate’s handling of the issue. Addressing the officers barring their entry, she said, “One day, you will be retired, and you’ll need the support of these same people you’re oppressing today. Is this the Nigeria you want for your children?”
The matter is now likely headed back to the appellate court for clarification. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has vowed to continue her legal battle, saying she is not just fighting for her seat, but for the democratic rights of her constituents and women across Nigeria.
“This is not just about me,” she said. “Let no woman be punished for speaking up. Let no Nigerian be silenced for demanding justice.”
The outcome of this legal and political impasse will set a powerful precedent. It will either reinforce the idea that courts can act as a check on legislative overreach or embolden lawmakers to punish dissent with little accountability.
The Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan saga is more than a personal or partisan dispute. It is a test of Nigeria’s democratic institutions, the limits of legislative power, and the strength of its judiciary. As the nation watches this unprecedented battle unfold, one thing is clear: democracy is not just defended in courtrooms or on Senate floors. Sometimes, it begins at a locked gate, with a determined woman refusing to back down.
