FCT High Court Criticizes Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan Over Social Media Post on Yahaya Bello Allegation
On Tuesday, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Maitama issued strong criticism against suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan (Kogi Central) over her controversial use of social media.
The court condemned her for publishing unverified claims on her X (formerly Twitter) account, which implicated former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello and infringed upon the privacy rights of an individual.
Presiding over the matter, Justice Sylvanus Oriji described the senator’s conduct as “improper, reprehensible, and unconscionable,” especially given her status as a federal lawmaker.
The judge noted that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan had published a photograph and the address of a residential property on her X account, alleging it was owned by former Governor Bello, who was reportedly evading arrest by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
“This court condemns the act of a sitting Senator posting the picture and address of the applicant’s home on social media, based merely on an unfounded belief that it belongs to Yahaya Bello,” Justice Oriji declared.
The ruling came in response to a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by Ali Bello, Chief of Staff to the Governor of Kogi State. The suit, marked FCT/HC/CV/2574/2024, alleged that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s post violated Section 37 of the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees the right to privacy.
Ali Bello claimed the Senator had falsely accused him of harboring Yahaya Bello in his Abuja residence while the EFCC was actively seeking the former governor. He also contended that she publicly asserted the property was owned by Bello and subject to an EFCC forfeiture order.
Justice Oriji addressed three main issues during his judgment:
Violation of Right to Privacy: The judge considered whether the senator’s publication violated the applicant’s constitutional right to privacy. He concluded that although the house is visible to the public, disclosing its address alongside speculative claims constituted a privacy infringement.
Petition to Law Enforcement: The court assessed whether Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s petition to the Inspector General of Police over the property’s ownership further violated the applicant’s rights.
Reliefs Sought by the Applicant: The judge reviewed the reliefs requested by Bello and whether they were justified under the law.
While the court acknowledged that a property in a visible location cannot be said to be completely private, it emphasized that the Senator’s insinuation — without credible evidence — that Yahaya Bello was being harbored there was unjustifiable.
Justice Oriji further ruled that the EFCC did not storm the property based on the Senator’s claims. He found no evidence supporting the allegation that the former governor was hiding in the house or that the property was part of any EFCC forfeiture proceedings.
“There is no proof before the court showing that the property in question belongs or ever belonged to Yahaya Bello,” the judge stated. “The respondent failed to substantiate her claim or provide credible evidence indicating the former governor was present at the location during the period in question.”
The court accepted Bello’s assertion that he is the lawful resident of the property, living there with his family. A judicial visit to the premises confirmed this fact.
“In the absence of contrary proof, the court holds that the applicant is the owner and resident of the property,” the judge said, aligning with the submissions of Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Adeola Adedipe, counsel to the applicant.
He concluded that the Senator lacked any legal or factual justification for the social media post linking Yahaya Bello to the address.
Referring to Section 37 of the Constitution, which protects the privacy of citizens and their homes, the judge remarked, “The right to privacy, though infrequently invoked in our courts, remains a constitutionally protected right. The applicant, like all Nigerian citizens, is entitled to its full protection.”
As a result, the court granted a declaratory relief in favor of Ali Bello, affirming that his constitutional rights had been violated.