On a tense afternoon in Abuja, Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court delivered a landmark verdict: the six‑month suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti‑Uduaghan is “excessive” and unconstitutional. The ruling struck at the heart of legislative overreach, declaring both Chapter 8 of the Senate Standing Rules and Section 14 of the Legislative Houses (Powers & Privileges) Act invalid for failing to cap suspension periods.
Akpoti‑Uduaghan, the first female senator from Kogi State and a rising star in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), had seen her office locked and her voice muted for nearly 180 days—effectively disconnected from her constituency. Justice Nyako underscored this, noting lawmakers are allocated 181 sitting days per cycle, and that six months’ suspension equated to “deprivation of representation”.
Yet while Justice Nyako rescinded the gag, she remained firm: Akpoti‑Uduaghan must apologise to the Senate for speaking out of turn on the floor, and publish said apology in national newspapers within seven days. A ₦5 million fine was also imposed for her alleged breach of an earlier court‑ordered media embargo. The ruling also defended Senate President Akpabio’s refusal to allow her to speak during that fateful plenary session—reiterating that her unrecognised seat did not entitle her to the floor.
The drama began on 20 February 2025, during a routine plenary. Akpoti‑Uduaghan refused an order to move seats after accusing Akpabio of orchestrating the switch to sideline her . This public standoff set off a cascade of explosive events.
Within weeks, she filed a petition alleging sexual harassment against Akpabio, asserting he had made inappropriate advances—telling her a motion “could be put to the Senate if she ‘took care’ of him,” or that she’d “enjoy quality moments” at his home in Ikot‑Ekpene.
The Senate’s Ethics Committee struck it down on procedural grounds, terming it “dead on arrival” for technical reasons—they claimed the petition lacked proper sponsorship . Undeterred, Akpoti‑Uduaghan re‑submitted it properly, backed by constituents.
On 6 March 2025, a partisan Senate suspended Akpoti‑Uduaghan for what it called “unruly and disruptive behavior”—decisively punishing her refusal to vacate the seat. The suspension stripped her of salary, security, and office access, escalating public outrage.
Her team immediately filed suit at the Federal High Court (Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025), seeking to halt the suspension. On 4 March, Justice Obiora Egwuatu granted an ex parte interim injunction halting Senate action—but the Senate ignored it, prompting contempt charges via a Form 48 notice to Akpabio, the Clerk, and the Ethics Chairman.
The Senate later challenged jurisdiction, declaring the matter an internal affair, but the court rejected that attempt outright.
The case was reassigned to Justice Nyako in early April after Justice Egwuatu recused himself due to perceived bias. Nyako then issued gag orders on press comments by any involved party, including Akpabio and Akpoti‑Uduaghan, warning of contempt.
Further stunts included contempt proceedings initiated by Akpoti‑Uduaghan and calls from legal luminaries like SAN West Idahosa condemning the Senate’s defiance as “damaging” to the judiciary.
The saga ignited a nationwide firestorm. Women’s rights activists organized under the banner #WeAreAllNatasha, staging protests across the country and beyond. Many posited:
“That’s messed up. This discourages women from speaking up when they find themselves being sexually harassed. This country is a joke.”
Another mourned:
“The issue has moved beyond whether Natasha had concrete evidence…it’s now about the Senate’s conduct and the dangerous precedent they’ve set…The world is watching.”
This became Nigeria’s own #MeToo moment, laying bare the systemic misogyny in its National Assembly. Only four women serve in the 109‑member Senate—down from seven in 2015—highlighting the gender gap that amplifies such moments.
Born 9 December 1979, Natasha Hadiza Akpoti‑Uduaghan is no newcomer to controversy. With a Nigerian father and Ukrainian mother, she holds degrees from the University of Abuja and the University of Dundee, including a Master of Laws and MBA. Before politics, she founded a developmental NGO and campaigned to revive the Ajaokuta Steel Mill—earning national accolades.
Her political journey is equally dramatic: in 2019, she lost a heated race for Kogi governor, alleging intimidation and heavy-handed tactics by APC officials. Though initially losing her 2023 senate race, she reclaimed the seat after tribunal reversal —becoming Kogi’s first elected female senator.
Her voice is unwavering. From international platforms (Arise TV, UN Women/IPU) she warned: “This was orchestrated to silence my voice…an assault on democracy.”
Akpabio’s Defense and Political Trade-Offs
Senate President Godswill Akpabio denied all misconduct. His defenders claim disciplinary actions were purely procedural: seat violations, speaking without recognition, and general disorderly conduct—unrelated to the harassment claims
Still, critics argue the Senate’s moves—for example ignoring court orders and rapid disciplinary actions—betray an abuse of institutional power. SAN Idahosa warned this public defiance of court injunctions undermines Nigeria’s rule of law.
On March 13, the Senate even faced potential jail time for contempt —a humiliation many saw as a public rebuke of legislative arrogance.
The legal ping-pong continued: Akpabio filed motions to appeal the injunction on March 20 and 25, but on 10 June 2025, the Court of Appeal struck them out, awarding ₦100,000 in costs to Akpoti‑Uduaghan. The move affirmed the High Court’s authority and strengthens Akpoti‑Uduaghan’s legal standing.
The appeal court’s dismissal signals judicial resolve, suggesting the Senate may now have to choose between legal compliance or risking further punitive fallout.
Justice Nyako’s ruling sets precedent
Justice Nyako’s ruling sets a powerful legal precedent: legislative houses cannot indefinitely suspend members without clear statutory limits. It’s a guardrail against unchecked legislative bullying.
Akpoti‑Uduaghan’s political star is rising. The Court of Appeal’s decision and nationwide support have elevated her cause beyond gender issues—they’re now about transparency, democracy, and legislative accountability.
Observers wonder: will she issue the court‑mandated apology? What consequences await if Akpabio delays implementing the reinstatement? Will this court order energize her next re-election campaign?
The raw language, visceral backlash, and viral protests reflect a populace fatigued by entrenched political sexism. The long-term victor may not be a person—it may be Nigeria’s evolving political culture.
The Senate must now plead its case in open court or against the public. If it continues to resist, contempt proceedings could result in jail time for senators—an unprecedented humiliation for the upper chamber.
Epilogue: The Court’s Scissors
In only seven pages, Justice Binta Nyako untied the Senate’s chokehold—but not without requiring a measured bow. Akpoti‑Uduaghan regains her seat, but must publicly apologize; the Senate stands corrected, but warned.
This watershed moment will echo far beyond the hallowed chambers of the National Assembly and Federal High Court. It’s a test case in gender politics, parliamentary discipline, judicial supremacy, and democratic equity. It’s the story of a young senator shattered but unbowed—and a Senate president brought to heel by legal checks.
On that pivotal day, February 20, 2025, a simple seat assignment spiraled into a constitutional reckoning. In the Nigerian Senator Chamber, nothing will ever look the same again.
Discussion about this post