From Victor Osula, Abuja
Senate President Godswill Akpabio has filed a notice of appeal challenging the ruling of the Federal High Court in Abuja that ordered the reinstatement of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan to the Senate.
Justice Binta Nyako had, on July 4, voided the six-month suspension imposed on Akpoti-Uduaghan by the Senate, describing it as “excessive, unconstitutional, and a violation of her constituents’ rights.”
The court also declared that the Senate’s disciplinary action lacked constitutional validity and breached her right to represent the people of Kogi Central.
The court further held that the provision of Chapter 8 of the Senate Standing Rules and Section 14 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act was overreaching, and that legislators must attend a minimum of 161 sitting days annually to ensure effective representation.
In a notice of appeal dated July 14, 2025, and filed at the Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal, Akpabio, through his legal team, urged the appellate court to set aside the lower court’s decision.
The Senate President contended that the Federal High Court erred in law by assuming jurisdiction over a matter that, according to him, concerns the internal affairs of the legislature and is therefore outside the court’s purview, as stipulated under Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution.
He argued that disputes relating to the rights and privileges of National Assembly members fall exclusively within the jurisdiction of the legislative body and are not justiciable.
Akpabio further faulted the trial court for dismissing his preliminary objection and granting reliefs that were, in his view, not properly before the court.
He insisted that the matter was prematurely filed and should have been handled internally through the Senate’s Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, in line with the Senate Standing Orders, 2023 (as amended).
He also accused the court of judicial overreach by making what he described as “advisory opinions” on Senate procedures and issuing an order for reinstatement without hearing full arguments from both parties on whether the suspension was indeed excessive.
In the appeal marked CA/A//2025, Akpabio alleged that the trial judge violated his right to fair hearing by raising and deciding issues suo motu—on the court’s own initiative—particularly the question of whether the suspension was disproportionate.
He also argued that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan failed to comply with Section 21 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, which requires that a three-month written notice be served on the Clerk to the National Assembly before instituting legal action against a legislative house.
Akpabio further asserted that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s case stemmed from words spoken during plenary and Senate resolutions—activities he claimed are protected under the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act—and that the court had no business intervening in such matters.
Among the reliefs sought, Akpabio is asking the appellate court to set aside the parts of the judgment that dismissed his preliminary objection and ordered the reinstatement of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan.
He is also asking the court to strike out the reliefs granted in her interlocutory and substantive applications on grounds of duplication and procedural irregularities.
Furthermore, he is urging the court to invoke its powers under Section 15 of the Court of Appeal Act to dismiss the suit in its entirety for lack of jurisdiction.
The legal battle adds a new twist to the controversy surrounding Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension, which included the withdrawal of her salary, security detail, and denial of access to the National Assembly complex.
