On July 4, 2025, the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Hon. Justice Binta Nyako, delivered judgment in the matter of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan v. President of the Senate & Anor, ruling that the Nigerian Senate acted ultra vires (beyond its legal authority) in suspending Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan from legislative duties for a period of six months.
Justice Nyako held that the Senate’s reliance on Chapter 8 of its Standing Orders and Section 14 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act was legally insufficient, as neither provision contains an express limitation on the duration of suspension, thereby permitting potential abuse. The court declared such reliance overbroad and constitutionally impermissible under the present circumstances.
The Hon. Court further emphasized that, under Section 63 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the National Assembly is obligated to convene for a minimum of 181 legislative sitting days per year. Therefore, the suspension of a duly elected senator for a commensurate length of time effectively nullifies the right of her constituents to legislative representation—a consequence the court found to be unconstitutional.
In her ruling, Justice Nyako stated:
“While the Senate has the authority to discipline its members, such sanctions must not go so far as to deny constituents their right to representation.”
Consequently, the court ordered the immediate recall of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan to resume her duties at the National Assembly.
In the same judgment, the Federal High Court upheld the conduct of Senate President Godswill Akpabio with respect to a separate procedural matter raised by the applicant.
Justice Binta Nyako ruled that the Senate President’s decision to deny Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan the opportunity to speak during plenary—on the procedural ground that she was not seated in her assigned chair—did not constitute a violation of her constitutional or procedural rights. The court held that such internal regulatory enforcement fell within the accepted parameters of parliamentary procedure and discretion.
However, the court rejected the Senate President’s broader argument that the judiciary lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter on the grounds that it involved the Senate’s “internal affairs.” Justice Nyako clarified that where questions of constitutional rights—particularly the right of constituents to legislative representation—are implicated, such matters fall squarely within the supervisory jurisdiction of the court.
In her words:
“Fundamental rights and the right to representation are matters clearly within the purview of judicial review. The doctrine of separation of powers does not insulate legislative actions from scrutiny where constitutional violations are alleged.”
In a related development, the Federal High Court imposed a monetary sanction upon Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan for contempt of court, having been found to have violated an existing judicial directive that expressly prohibited all parties from issuing public statements concerning the subject matter of the ongoing litigation.
Justice Binta Nyako held that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s public commentary—made in defiance of the court’s non-publication order—constituted a breach of the court’s authority and a willful act of contempt.
Accordingly, the court imposed a financial penalty in the amount of several million Naira, underscoring the judiciary’s intolerance for violations of its orders and the imperative of maintaining the integrity of ongoing proceedings.#newsafro_
