Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan of Kogi Central is once again at the center of political drama as her much-anticipated return to the National Assembly has been stalled despite the expiration of her six-month suspension.
Her lawyer, Victor Giwa, had earlier confirmed that she was ready to resume plenary on September 23, following a vacation in London. “Actually, she’s ready to resume her term. She’s in London. Everything is in place, and the six months have expired. The only thing left is her resumption,” Giwa assured reporters.
The optimism, however, quickly faded when the National Assembly issued a letter through its Acting Clerk, Dr. Yahaya Danzaria, stating that her suspension remains in force pending the outcome of an appeal case she filed against the Senate. The letter, dated September 4, emphasized that “the matter remains sub judice, and until the judicial process is concluded, no administrative action can be taken to facilitate your resumption.” This pronouncement effectively blocked her from taking back her seat.
Akpoti-Uduaghan had been suspended on March 6, 2025, after the Senate adopted a report by its Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, which accused her of insubordination for refusing to vacate her designated seat during plenary. The punishment stripped her of salaries, aides, and office privileges. However, the senator maintained that her ordeal was linked to her petition accusing Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment—a claim the Senate dismissed.
Despite her insistence that her suspension was politically motivated, she abided by the penalty while simultaneously challenging it in court. In April, she announced that she had secured a judgment in her favor. But Senate leadership refused to recognize it, insisting she would remain suspended until the full six months elapsed. Even after serving the full term, however, the Senate now cites the pending appeal as a reason to bar her return.
The development has sparked strong reactions from opposition parties, legal experts, and civil society groups. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) condemned the Senate’s decision, describing it as a calculated attempt to silence opposition voices. In a statement, PDP’s spokesperson Debo Ologunagba said, “The attempt to use the National Assembly establishment against an elected senator of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in gross violation of the Constitution and the Standing Rules of the Senate is highly provocative and constitutes a clear and present danger to democracy.”
The PDP further alleged that the move was part of a broader trend of “creeping totalitarianism” under the APC-led government. The party demanded that the Senate Clerk withdraw the letter immediately, accusing Senate President Akpabio of weaponizing the institution against Akpoti-Uduaghan. It also called on international observers, human rights organizations, and democratic institutions to intervene and ensure she is allowed to resume her duties.
Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) have also weighed in, faulting the Senate’s insistence on keeping her out of the chamber. Adedayo Adedeji (SAN) argued that prolonging her suspension beyond six months was unconstitutional. “Section 60 empowers the Senate to regulate its own procedure, but Section 68 makes clear that a member can only vacate a seat in specific circumstances. A temporary suspension must not be used to deny constituents their right to representation,” he said.
Quoting Justice Binta Nyako in an earlier ruling, Adedeji recalled: “I do not think this is the intention of the framer of the law. To make a law that has no end is excessive and cannot be the intention of the law… The Senate has the power to… recall the plaintiff and at the same time allow her to represent the people who sent her there.” He warned that indefinite suspension undermines constitutional governance.
Wale Balogun (SAN) echoed similar sentiments, stating that the Senate’s position deprived the people of Kogi Central of their right to representation. “I feel that the Senate should be magnanimous in the interest of a constitutional democracy. It’s not only about Senator Natasha. They should remember it’s about the good people of Kogi Central senatorial district,” he argued. He added that Natasha had already served her six-month suspension and that the pending court case should not be used as an excuse to keep her out indefinitely.
Paul Obi (SAN) was even more direct, calling the Senate’s stance “overkill.” He stated: “You have put the woman on suspension for six months. She has tried to get the courts to reverse that. Six months are drawing near now, and you want to start using judicial process to extend that six months. That would be ultra vires. They want to extend the suspension surreptitiously. That’s not right.”
Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (SAN) described the Senate’s action as petty and vindictive. He argued, “Once the six months expire, she should be allowed to resume her seat in the Senate automatically. Failure to allow her to resume is indirectly extending the suspension beyond six months, without a valid resolution of the Senate to that effect.” He warned that such actions not only violate the Constitution but also undermine democracy.
On the other hand, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN) took a contrary view, advising both the Senate and Akpoti-Uduaghan to see the court case through to the end. “On Natasha, the last time I checked, I thought I saw both parties in court with appeals and cross appeals. This means that both parties should fight their appeals and await the court’s pronouncement,” Ozekhome said, suggesting patience rather than confrontation.
Civil society groups have also entered the fray, with the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) demanding Natasha’s immediate reinstatement. “The Senate cannot use the pending case(s) in court as a pretext to prevent Mrs Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan from resuming legislative duties. This is antithetical to the fundamental notion of the rule of law,” SERAP said in a statement.
The group further stressed, “There is no law in Nigeria that prevents the resumption of her legislative duties pending the determination of the case(s) in court. This travesty of justice must end.” SERAP called for the restoration of her salaries and allowances, emphasizing that she had already endured the prescribed suspension and must not be further punished.
SERAP concluded by warning that preventing her resumption violates Nigeria’s constitutional and international human rights obligations. “No one should ever be punished for ‘speaking without permission.’ Being a senator does not deprive Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan of her fundamental human rights,” the group stated, adding that the Senate should set an example by upholding the rule of law rather than undermining it.
The controversy over Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension has therefore escalated into a test case for constitutional democracy in Nigeria. With political parties, legal heavyweights, and rights groups taking opposing positions, all eyes will be on the Court of Appeal—and on the Senate leadership—to see whether the lawmaker will indeed be allowed to reclaim her seat after serving out her suspension.