Senate President Godswill Akpabio has filed an appeal challenging a recent judgment by the Federal High Court that ordered the Senate to reverse the suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, who represents Kogi Central.
The appeal, dated July 14, 2025, was submitted to the Court of Appeal in Abuja. Akpabio is contesting the July 4 ruling by Justice Binta Nyako, who declared the Senate’s six-month suspension of Akpoti-Uduaghan as excessive and a violation of the rights of her constituents to adequate representation.
Although the judge affirmed the Senate’s constitutional powers to discipline its members, she held that the nature and duration of the suspension went too far. Nyako also fined the senator ₦5 million for contempt of court, citing a satirical Facebook post she made while the case was ongoing, which the court considered a breach of an earlier restraining order.
Meanwhile, Akpoti-Uduaghan has also filed an appeal, disputing the contempt ruling. She argues that the alleged misconduct occurred outside the courtroom — a situation known legally as ex facie curiae — and, therefore, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to punish her for it.
Akpabio’s legal team has filed a cross-appeal, asserting that the Federal High Court had no authority to intervene in what they describe as internal legislative matters. Citing Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution, the Senate President’s lawyers argued that the court overstepped its bounds by meddling in the internal workings of the legislature.
In his 11-point appeal, Akpabio faulted the trial court for ignoring his preliminary objection and issuing what he called intrusive declarations that infringe on the independence of the legislature as protected by the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act.
His legal team insisted that issues such as suspensions, comments made during plenary sessions, and Senate resolutions fall squarely within the purview of legislative procedure and are not subject to court review. They further argued that Akpoti-Uduaghan jumped the gun by going to court without first exploring internal resolution mechanisms like the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions — a process clearly outlined in the Senate Standing Orders (2023, as amended).
Akpabio accuses judge of fair hearing denial
Akpabio also accused the judge of denying him a fair hearing, stating that the court decided on matters — particularly the proportionality of the suspension — that neither party had raised during arguments. He said this amounted to judicial overreach and undermined the principle of impartial adjudication.
His appeal also criticised the court for collapsing interim applications and substantive claims into one ruling, which, according to his counsel, breaches standard legal procedures. They further argued that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suit should have been dismissed outright for failing to comply with Section 21 of the Legislative Houses Act, which requires that a three-month pre-litigation notice be served on the Clerk of the National Assembly.
Akpabi urged the appellate court to overturn the High Court’s decision, validate the Senate’s disciplinary action, and reinforce the autonomy of legislative proceedings.
