The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja has upheld the suspension of the senator representing Kogi Central, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, ruling that the Senate acted within its constitutional powers when it disciplined her for misconduct.
In a unanimous judgment delivered by a three-member panel of justices, the appellate court held that the suspension did not violate Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s parliamentary privileges or her fundamental rights as guaranteed under the Constitution. The court said the Senate followed its internal rules and procedures in handling the matter.
However, the Court of Appeal set aside the contempt proceedings and the N5 million fine earlier imposed on the senator over a satirical apology she made to the Senate President, Senator Godswill Akpabio. The court ruled that while the Senate had the authority to discipline its members, the punishment related to contempt was not justified in the circumstances of the case.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Abba Muhammed explained that the issues before the court centered on whether the Senate acted lawfully in suspending the lawmaker and whether her rights were breached during the process. The court resolved these issues largely in favour of the Senate.
One of the major points considered by the court was the incident that occurred during plenary on February 20, 2025. On that day, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan attempted to speak during proceedings while not seated in the official seat allocated to her. The Senate President reportedly denied her the opportunity to speak, citing Senate rules.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the Senate President’s action, stating that the Senate President is empowered by the Senate Rules to assign seats to lawmakers and maintain order during plenary sessions. The court held that lawmakers are only allowed to speak from their officially assigned seats.
According to the judgment, “The Senate President was not wrong to deny the appellant the opportunity to speak, having regard to the fact that she was not on the seat allocated to her during plenary.”
The court further stated that legislative chambers around the world operate based on rules and order, and that members are expected to comply with these rules at all times. Failure to do so, the court noted, could attract disciplinary measures.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension followed a series of disagreements and exchanges within the Senate chamber, which later attracted public attention. Her case became a subject of national debate, with supporters arguing that her suspension was too harsh, while others maintained that discipline is necessary to preserve order and respect in the legislature.
In its ruling, the appellate court made it clear that the Senate, as an arm of government, has the power to regulate its internal affairs, including disciplining its members for misconduct. The court said it would not interfere in such matters unless there was clear evidence of abuse of power or violation of constitutional rights.
On the issue of contempt and the N5 million fine, the court took a different position. The fine was linked to a satirical apology the senator made to the Senate President, which the Senate viewed as disrespectful. The Court of Appeal ruled that while the Senate could express displeasure, the contempt proceedings and fine went beyond what was necessary.
As a result, the court vacated both the contempt ruling and the financial penalty imposed on the senator. This aspect of the judgment was seen by legal observers as a partial relief for Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan.
The case has drawn attention to the balance between legislative authority and individual rights within Nigeria’s democratic system. Legal analysts say the judgment reinforces the principle that courts generally avoid interfering in the internal workings of the legislature, except where constitutional limits are clearly crossed.
For many Nigerians, the case also highlights ongoing concerns about discipline, freedom of expression, and power relations within the National Assembly. Some civil society groups have called for clearer rules and more transparent disciplinary processes to prevent future disputes.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, a first-time senator, has been a vocal and sometimes controversial figure in the Senate since her election. Her supporters see her as outspoken and bold, while critics argue that lawmakers must always respect parliamentary rules and leadership.
With the Appeal Court’s decision, the suspension remains valid, bringing legal closure to one of the most talked-about disputes in the current Senate. It is not yet clear whether the senator will pursue the matter further by approaching the Supreme Court.