The Controversy Surrounding Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan's Suspension: Matters Arising

By Olu Ibekwe

The suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan from the Nigerian Senate for six months has sparked significant debate regarding procedural fairness, legal compliance, and potential institutional bias. The case involves several key issues, including allegations of sexual harassment, procedural irregularities, and concerns over the misuse of legislative authority. This article examines the controversy in depth, highlighting the broader implications for governance, justice, and legislative integrity in Nigeria.

Background of the Controversy

1. Allegations of Sexual Harassment

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan accused Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment, claiming that he made inappropriate advances toward her during a courtesy visit in December 2023. She formalized her allegations by submitting a petition to the Senate. However, the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions dismissed the petition on procedural grounds, stating that she had personally signed it, in contravention of Senate rules.

This episode in the Senate reminds Nigerians of the past allegations of sexual harassment leveled against Senator Akpabio by the former acting Managing Director of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC), Dr. Joi Nunieh. In 2020, Dr. Nunieh publicly accused Akpabio of sexual harassment, abuse of office, and other forms of intimidation, further reinforcing concerns about his conduct in public office.

2. Dispute Over Seating Arrangement

Before the harassment allegations surfaced, tensions arose when Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s seat was reassigned without her consent following a chamber reshuffle. She viewed this move as an attempt to sideline her and limit her visibility during legislative proceedings. Her refusal to accept the reassignment led to a confrontation with the Senate leadership, culminating in a heated exchange with Senate President Akpabio.

This action raises questions of double standards, as Senator Akpabio himself, while serving as a senator during the tenure of Senate President Bukola Saraki, refused a sitting arrangement assigned to him and even engaged in a shouting match, yet was not disciplined for his actions. The discrepancy in how similar incidents were handled highlights concerns about bias and selective enforcement of Senate rules.

3. Suspension from the Senate

Citing violations of Senate standing rules and actions that allegedly brought the institution into disrepute, the Senate adopted the ethics committee’s recommendation to suspend Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months. The suspension entails barring her from legislative activities, locking her office, and withholding her salaries and allowances. The Senate stipulated that she must submit a written apology before any consideration of lifting or reducing the suspension.

However, having dismissed Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s petition on procedural grounds, the imposition of a sanction of suspension was in error. If her petition was not considered on its merits due to a technicality, then disciplining her for bringing the petition forward contradicts the principles of fairness and due process. The Senate's handling of this matter suggests that the disciplinary action was punitive rather than a measured response to a rules violation.

4. Allegations of Bias and Legal Actions

Critics have condemned the Senate’s handling of the case, alleging bias and a failure to uphold due process. In response, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan has filed a lawsuit against Senate President Akpabio, seeking ₦100 billion in damages for the alleged harassment. She has also described her suspension as unjust and illegal, vowing to continue serving her constituents despite the Senate’s decision.

5. Broader Implications

This incident has sparked discussions about the treatment of female lawmakers in Nigeria, the integrity of parliamentary procedures, and the balance of power within the legislative arm of government. Observers have called for an independent investigation to ensure justice and maintain public trust in the Senate’s integrity.

Additionally, a recent video has surfaced, further fueling debates around the legitimacy of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension and the wider concerns of bias in the Senate’s disciplinary process. The video sheds more light on the events leading up to her suspension and raises questions about the credibility of the Senate's actions.

Key Issues Raised

1. Continuation of Investigation Despite Court Order

A Federal High Court in Abuja issued an interim injunction restraining the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions from proceeding with disciplinary actions against Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan. However, the committee continued its investigation, citing the principle of separation of powers and asserting that parliamentary procedures are not subject to judicial intervention.

While separation of powers is fundamental to democracy, ignoring a court order undermines the rule of law. Legal experts argue that this sets a dangerous precedent for legislative overreach and demonstrates a disregard for judicial authority.

2. Dismissal of Senator’s Petition on Procedural Grounds

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s petition alleging sexual harassment by Senate President Akpabio was dismissed solely on procedural grounds, specifically that she had personally signed it, which Senate rules prohibit.

Although procedural rules are essential for maintaining order, dismissing a serious allegation without investigating its merits raises concerns about justice and accountability. A fair and transparent system should balance procedural requirements with substantive justice by ensuring that critical claims are fully examined.

3. Senate President Presiding Over His Own Case

Senate President Akpabio presided over the sessions addressing both the allegations against him and the subsequent disciplinary actions against Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan.

Natural justice and impartiality dictate that a presiding officer facing personal allegations should recuse themselves from proceedings to prevent conflicts of interest. By failing to do so, Akpabio’s involvement raises concerns about the integrity and fairness of the Senate’s decision-making process.

4. Allegations of Bias and Protectionism

The series of events—dismissal of the harassment petition, continued disciplinary actions despite a court order, and the Senate President’s active role—has led to perceptions of a coordinated effort to protect the Senate leadership and marginalize Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan. Furthermore, stopping her salaries and allowances could be seen as a tactic to frustrate her ability to seek legal redress.

Such perceptions erode public trust in legislative institutions. The need for impartial, transparent, and fair processes is especially critical when allegations involve high-ranking officials.

5. Legal Precedents on the Suspension of Legislators

Past judicial rulings have consistently established that legislative bodies lack the constitutional authority to suspend members. For example:

·       In Hon. Abdulmumin Jibrin v. House of Representatives, the Federal High Court held that the House lacked the power to suspend Jibrin or any other member, even for a single day.

·       In Senator Ali Ndume v. Senate, the court ruled that Ndume’s suspension was an “exhibition of lawlessness” by the Senate.

Given these precedents, the suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan appears legally questionable and potentially unconstitutional.

Conclusion: A Call for Justice and Fairness

Rather than scapegoating Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan for the allegations she raised, a responsible institution should prioritize justice and due process. The dismissal of her petition on technical grounds, without a thorough investigation, contradicts the principles of justice and equity. The question remains: If Senate President Akpabio is innocent, why not allow an impartial investigation?

The handling of this case underscores significant concerns about legal adherence, procedural fairness, conflict of interest, and institutional bias within the Nigerian Senate. It is imperative that legislative bodies adhere to democratic principles, respect judicial authority, and ensure that their processes reflect fairness, transparency, and accountability. Failing to do so risks undermining public confidence in the rule of law and democratic governance in Nigeria.

 

Olu Ibekwe is the Chairperson of the Steering Committee of the African Parliamentary Press Network (APPN)

#NigerianSenate #NatashaAkpoti #GodswillAkpabio #SexualHarassment #PoliticalBias #LegislativeJustice #SenateSuspension #RuleOfLaw #Governance #NigeriaPolitics #JusticeForNatasha