Senate President Godswill Akpabio has approached the Court of Appeal in Abuja to contest the ruling of the Federal High Court, which recently ordered the reinstatement of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan to the Senate following her suspension.
In a notice of appeal dated July 14, 2025, filed at the Abuja Division of the appellate court, Akpabio seeks to overturn the July 4, 2025, judgment delivered by Justice Binta Nyako.
The ruling had directed that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan be recalled and permitted to resume her legislative duties, emphasizing that her suspension by the Senate was unconstitutional and violated the rights of her constituents.
Previously, IREPORT247NEWS had reported that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal team had served the National Assembly leadership with a certified true copy of the Federal High Court judgment mandating her immediate reinstatement to the Senate.
The judgment was the outcome of a suit the senator filed, challenging her suspension and the alleged denial of her constitutional right to represent her constituency.
In her comprehensive verdict, Justice Binta Nyako ruled that the six-month suspension imposed on Akpoti-Uduaghan — equating to 180 sitting days — was excessive, punitive, and in clear contravention of Section 63 of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees continuous representation for all constituencies.
The judge condemned the Senate’s actions, emphasizing that such prolonged suspension undermines the rights of both the legislator and the electorate who voted her into office.
Justice Nyako further reinforced the judiciary’s constitutional authority to scrutinize, interpret, and invalidate legislative provisions or rules that infringe upon constitutional rights.
She specifically invalidated portions of Chapter 8 of the Senate Standing Rules and Section 14 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, describing them as “overreaching” and vague regarding the permissible duration for suspending elected representatives.
Additionally, the court dismissed preliminary objections raised by Senate President Akpabio, who argued that the judiciary lacked the jurisdiction to interfere in what he described as internal parliamentary matters.
Justice Nyako, however, ruled that the case transcended mere legislative procedures, as it involved fundamental constitutional rights — both of the senator and her constituents. She declared that the Senate must act within the bounds of proportionality when disciplining its members and must avoid actions that effectively disenfranchise the electorate.
“This case is not simply about procedural matters within the legislature; it fundamentally concerns the constitutional rights of voters and their elected representative,” the judge stated.
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan Serves Recall Judgment to NASS
In response, Akpabio, in his 11-ground notice of appeal, criticized the Federal High Court’s decision. He contended that the court erred by dismissing his preliminary objection and by making determinations that, in his view, infringe on legislative autonomy.
He argued that the matter was premature since Akpoti-Uduaghan allegedly failed to exhaust internal Senate dispute resolution mechanisms, notably those provided by the Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, as stipulated under the Senate Standing Orders of 2023 (as amended).
Akpabio further alleged that the trial court violated his right to a fair hearing by raising and determining issues not canvassed by either party, particularly the claim that the suspension was excessive. He faulted the court for issuing recommendations on Akpoti-Uduaghan’s recall without affording both sides the opportunity to fully argue the matter.
Moreover, Akpabio accused the Federal High Court of procedural lapses by merging the interlocutory reliefs sought by the senator with the substantive claims in the same judgment, despite their duplication.
He also contended that the suit ought to have been dismissed for non-compliance with Section 21 of the Legislative Houses Act, which mandates that a three-month notice be served on the Clerk of the National Assembly prior to instituting any legal action against the legislature.
Among the reliefs sought in the appeal, Akpabio is asking the Court of Appeal to:
Allow his appeal and set aside the entire judgment of the Federal High Court.
Strike out what he described as duplicated reliefs in Akpoti-Uduaghan’s multiple applications.
Dismiss the senator’s suit for lack of jurisdiction.
Reject what he termed the trial court’s “advisory opinions” directed at the Senate, particularly those suggesting amendments to its rules or compelling the recall of a suspended member.
The legal tussle is shaping up to be a significant constitutional test of the limits of legislative authority and the judiciary’s power to intervene in parliamentary affairs.