Issues News

“Senate Wins, Natasha Loses!” Appeal Court Upholds Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Suspension as Lawmakers Celebrate ‘Victory for Autonomy’

“Senate Wins, Natasha Loses!” Appeal Court Upholds Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Suspension as Lawmakers Celebrate ‘Victory for Autonomy’

The long-running legal battle between the Nigerian Senate and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan reached a decisive conclusion on Monday, as the Court of Appeal in Abuja firmly sided with the Red Chamber, affirming its right to suspend “erring members.”

In a unanimous judgment that has been hailed by the Senate leadership as a “reinforcement of parliamentary autonomy,” the three-member panel ruled that the March 2025 suspension of the Kogi Central lawmaker was legally sound. The court dismissed Akpoti-Uduaghan’s claims that her rights were violated, stating instead that her refusal to obey the Senate President’s directives during the infamous “seating dispute” constituted a clear breach of legislative order.

“The Senate is empowered by its own rules to maintain decorum,” the lead judgment delivered by Justice Abba Bello Mohammed stated. “A member’s privilege is subject to the rules of the chamber, and refusing to speak from an officially allocated seat is a violation of those rules.”

Reacting to the news, Senate spokesperson Adeyemi Adaramodu praised the judiciary for protecting the independence of the legislature. He noted that the ruling serves as a warning that no individual lawmaker is above the collective rules of the “Red Chamber.”

However, it wasn’t a total loss for the embattled Senator. In a surprising twist, the Appellate Court quashed the ₦5 million fine and contempt charges previously handed down by a lower court over Natasha’s social media posts. The judges ruled that while her suspension was valid, the additional financial punishment was “unnecessary.”

See also  Nigeria At 60: I Disagree With A Bleak View Of Our History, Says Osinbajo

The verdict ends nearly a year of uncertainty for the people of Kogi Central, whose representation was silenced during the six-month suspension period. As the Senate prepares to fully integrate the ruling into its disciplinary protocols, the case stands as a significant precedent for the limits of judicial interference in the “internal affairs” of the National Assembly.

[logo-slider]