Akpabio appeals judgement on Natasha Akpoti’s suspension

Senate President Godswill Akpabio has filed an appeal seeking to overturn a federal high court judgement which directed the senate to lift the suspension imposed on Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, senator representing Kogi central.

The notice of appeal, dated July 14, 2025, was filed at the Abuja division of the court of appeal.

Akpabio is challenging the July 4 ruling delivered by Binta Nyako, which described the six-month suspension of Akpoti-Uduaghan as “overreaching” and in violation of her constituents’ right to representation.

While the court acknowledged the senate’s constitutional authority to discipline its members, Nyako held that the length and nature of Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension were excessive. The court also imposed a ₦5 million fine on the senator for contempt, citing a satirical Facebook post made during the proceedings that allegedly breached an earlier restraining order.

In response, Akpoti-Uduaghan has filed her own appeal, contesting the contempt ruling on jurisdictional grounds. She argued that the trial court lacked the authority to entertain a contempt charge based on conduct that occurred ex facie curiae — that is, outside the courtroom.

Akpabio’s legal team, in a cross-appeal, has also challenged the jurisdiction of the federal high court. They argued that the matter involves internal parliamentary affairs, which are beyond judicial scrutiny under Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution.

In his 11-ground appeal, Akpabio faulted the trial court for dismissing his preliminary objection and making pronouncements that, in his view, intrude on the legislative autonomy guaranteed under the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act.

He contended that parliamentary procedures, including suspensions, utterances during plenary, and senate resolutions, are shielded from judicial interference. The appeal further argued that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suit was premature, as it failed to exhaust internal mechanisms, notably the senate committee on ethics, privileges, and public petitions, as required by the Senate Standing Orders (2023, as amended).

Akpabio also accused the trial judge of denying him a fair hearing by raising and deciding on issues such as whether the suspension was excessive, that either party did not canvas. He described this as a breach of judicial neutrality.

In addition, the appeal criticised the court for merging interlocutory reliefs with substantive claims, a move Akpabio’s lawyers said violated legal procedure. They also argued that the suit should have been struck out for failure to comply with Section 21 of the Legislative Houses Act, which mandates a three-month pre-action notice to the clerk of the national assembly before instituting legal proceedings.

Akpabio is asking the appellate court to allow his appeal, set aside the judgement of the federal high court, and affirm the senate’s disciplinary action against Akpoti-Uduaghan.