Court Confirms No Order to Lift Sen. Natasha’s Suspension, CTC Reveals It Was Merely Advisory

Natasha and Akpabio

A Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment delivered by Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in the suit filed by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan against the Senate, has revealed that the court merely issued an advisory not an order regarding her suspension.

According to the CTC, the court offered an advisory opinion rather than issuing a directive on the legality of her controversial suspension and the call for her recall.

The judgment, delivered on Friday, July 4, 2025, sparked significant public interest, especially after weeks of conflicting interpretations.

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan had filed the suit against the Clerk of the National Assembly, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, in response to her suspension on March 6, 2025.

The court clarified that it did not mandate the Senate to lift her suspension but merely advised the upper chamber to consider recalling her.

Key Excerpts from the Certified True Copy

Justice Nyako ruled as follows:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

1. That all previous orders and pending applications before this Court in relation to the matter are hereby set aside, except the Originating Summons, preliminary objections, and motion for interlocutory injunction, which shall be taken together.
2. That having found the Plaintiff to have acted in breach of this Court’s subsisting order, the Plaintiff must take responsibility and remedy the breach. Accordingly, she is ordered to pay a fine of ₦5 million to the Federal Government and publish a public apology in two national dailies and on her Facebook page within seven (7) days to purge herself of contempt.
3. That the preliminary objection succeeds in part, as some aspects of the cause of action may be inchoate. However, in matters involving enforcement of fundamental rights, a claim may lie where infringement is imminent, ongoing, or likely to occur.
4. That the application for interlocutory injunction, whose reliefs mirror those in the Originating Summons, is hereby subsumed into the Originating Summons and shall be determined together.
5. That reliefs 1, 2, and 3 require interpretation of Orders 9, 10, and 11 of the Senate Rules concerning the privileges accruing to a Senator.
6. That a Senator may only raise issues of privilege after complying with Chapter 3, Order 6 of the Senate Rules.
7. That the Senate Rules are superior to the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, by virtue of Section 20 thereof.
8. That Order 6 of the Senate Rules grants the Senate President unconditional authority to allocate and reallocate seats to Senators.
9. That regarding reliefs 4 and 5—which relate to the conduct of the 2nd and 3rd Respondents as long as the Plaintiff is not occupying her allocated seat, the Respondents should take no action in her matter, as she has not complied with applicable Senate Rules.
10. That suspending a Senator for six months, equivalent to 180 sitting days, effectively removes the member for an entire legislative year. This is excessive and contravenes Section 63 of the 1999 Constitution, which mandates member attendance.
11. That the Senate has the authority and arguably the responsibility to review its internal rules and may amend Section 14(2) of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act if deemed excessive or overreaching.
12. That while not an enforceable order, the Senate is urged to recall the Plaintiff and permit her to resume representing her constituents.

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, who represents Kogi Central under the platform of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), was suspended on March 6, 2025, for alleged misconduct during a plenary session.

According to the Senate, she had spoken out of turn, refused to occupy her designated seat, and made what it termed “unsubstantiated” allegations.

Her suspension closely followed a petition she filed accusing Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment a development that added significant political and public weight to the matter.