Senate President Godswill Akpabio has congratulated senators for the Court of Appeal decision maintaining Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s six-month suspension in March 2025.
Akpabio delivered the remarks at the start of an extraordinary plenary session on Tuesday.
The Abuja Court of Appeal found that the Senate’s suspension of Akpoti-Uduaghan for alleged wrongdoing was within its constitutional rights.
The three-member panel of the appellate court ruled unanimously that the suspension did not violate Akpoti-Uduaghan’s parliamentary privilege or constitutional rights.
Addressing senators, Akpabio said, “Your rules derive from the Nigerian Constitution, and the Standing Orders of the Senate must always be adhered to.
“Any community without law and order will live in anarchy, and so the suspension that you handed over to one of your colleagues for unruly behavior in the Senate was confirmed by the Court of Appeal.
“So, I will say it was judicially confirmed by the Court of Appeal as the court went forward to say that you have the power to discipline any erring officer of government.
“So, I said I should just mention that; congratulations, and that we also applaud the judiciary for their firmness.”
The appellate court, in a unanimous ruling by a three-member panel of justices, stated that the appellant’s parliamentary privilege and constitutional rights were not violated as a result of her Senate suspension.
However, it annulled the contempt action and N5 million punishment imposed on Natasha for her humorous apologies to the Senate President.
Furthermore, the appellate court, in its lead verdict delivered by Justice A. B. Muhammed, found that the Senate President was not improper in denying the Appellant, who was not in the official seat allotted to her during plenary on February 20, 2025, the right to speak.
It ruled that the Senate President is empowered by the rules to assign seats to members and that parliamentarians can only speak from seats assigned to them.
The disagreement came from a February 2025 plenary session in which Natasha highlighted concerns of privilege and alleged procedural violations.
The case was referred to the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, which later recommended her suspension.
Dissatisfied, the legislator filed a complaint with the Federal High Court in Abuja, alleging a violation of her right to a fair hearing as well as noncompliance with Senate standing orders.
The court criticized the suspension in its July 4, 2025, decision, calling it harsh and unlawful.
Following proceedings in the Court of Appeal, Akpabio has brought the case to the Supreme Court, seeking an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal, leave to appeal on mixed law and fact grounds, and an order deeming his notice of appeal and brief of argument correctly submitted.
The former governor said that the Senate acted within its authority under Section 60 of the 1999 Constitution, which permits the National Assembly to oversee its own internal operations.
Akpabio further maintained that the Senate President was not required to rule on every issue of privilege right away and that the Senate legitimately initiated its disciplinary procedure.
However, Akpoti-Uduaghan has maintained that her suspension was illegal and carried out without a fair hearing, claiming that the Senate failed to follow its own procedures.
On Thursday, it was announced that her lawyers had received Supreme Court processes.
The case also involves a related contempt issue arising from a social media post by Akpoti-Uduaghan while the suit was pending. The Federal High Court fined her and ordered a public apology, which she has also appealed.
The Supreme Court’s decision could clarify the limits of legislative discipline and judicial intervention. The development comes barely two weeks after Akpabio announced that he had decided to withdraw pending court cases.
Her office has been shut since March 6, 2025, after she was suspended for alleged wrongdoing during a protest against Akpabio’s relocation of her seat on February 20.
Despite the ban expiring in September, she was unable to return immediately owing to ongoing legal fights and opposition from Senate leadership.
Following the July 4 decision, she notified the Senate that she intended to resume, but her request was first denied.
