Natasha Akpoti alleges selective prosecution, seeks dismissal of criminal charges

Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, senator representing Kogi central, has asked the federal capital territory (FCT) high court to dismiss the criminal charges filed against her by the federal government.

In May, the federal government, acting through the office of the attorney-general of the federation (AGF), instituted two separate charges against Akpoti-Uduaghan — one under the penal code at the FCT high court, and another under the cybercrimes act at the federal high court.

The charges followed petitions by Godswill Akpabio, the senate president, and Yahaya Bello, former governor of Kogi state.

The senator, through her lawyers, raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the case amounts to “political persecution” and an abuse of prosecutorial powers.

Her legal team includes Roland Otaru, Emmanuel West-Idahosa, Jibrin Usman, and Michael Numa — all senior advocates of Nigeria.

In her objection, Akpoti-Uduaghan claimed the AGF is constitutionally bound to act in the public interest, and not to protect the reputations of private individuals.

She argued that both Akpabio and Bello have long been subjects of public commentary and criticism in the media, yet chose to initiate the case only now.

Her lawyers alleged that the charges were designed to gag free speech and intimidate her as a member of the opposition.

“The alleged defamatory remarks fall within the realm of public discourse and do not threaten national security,” the defence said.

“Prosecution in this instance is not in the public interest and amounts to wasting taxpayers’ money.”

The senator also contended that the AGF lacks the locus standi to prosecute defamation claims, which are ordinarily civil in nature.

She said no law enforcement investigation preceded the charges, even though her own petitions alleging threats to her life by the complainants were “ignored”.

Her legal team said the prosecution violates her fundamental rights by “selectively criminalising her political speech while overlooking her own complaints”.

“The charges are frivolous, unconstitutional and politically motivated. They should be dismissed at the preliminary stage to safeguard the integrity of the justice system,” the defence submitted.