The National Assembly clarifies its role in Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan resumption, emphasizing that only the Senate and courts can authorize her return.
The Office of the Clerk to the National Assembly has officially clarified its role in the ongoing controversy over Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan resumption following her six-month suspension by the Senate.
Recent reports suggested the administrative office could influence her return, but the Clerk’s office has dispelled such claims.
“The Clerk does not possess the authority to review, reverse, or interpret Senate decisions,” said Mullah Bi-Allah, Director of Information.
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, representing Kogi Central under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), was suspended by the Senate on March 6, 2025, following a resolution barring her from parliamentary activities for six months. Key points about the suspension:
Initiated following Senate proceedings over alleged procedural breaches
Challenged in the Federal High Court, which upheld the suspension
Currently pending before the Court of Appeal
Although the suspension’s details were not publicly disclosed, the case has attracted significant media and public attention due to the lawmaker’s high-profile status and the political implications.
On September 4, 2025, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan wrote to the Clerk of the National Assembly, notifying the office of her intention to resume duties.
However, in line with parliamentary protocol, such correspondence should be addressed to the Senate President rather than the administrative arm.
The Clerk’s office subsequently forwarded the letter to Senate leadership for consideration.
“Any change in status must either come from a fresh Senate resolution or a definitive court order,” the statement said.
“The Clerk is therefore not in a position to facilitate her resumption at this time.”
This careful handling underscores the strict adherence to parliamentary procedures and ensures the Clerk’s office remains impartial in politically sensitive matters.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal team, M. J. Numa & Partners LLP, submitted a petition accusing the Clerk’s office of overreach and threatening disciplinary action. In response, Bi-Allah emphasized:
“The determination of whether Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan resumption occurs as of right, without any further or fresh Senate resolution following the expiration of her six-month suspension, lies solely with the Senate and not with the office of the Clerk.”
Legal experts note that the Clerk’s office functions strictly as an administrative body—responsible for logistics, communications, and procedural support—but has no authority to overturn or interpret Senate resolutions independently.
Key responsibilities of the Clerk’s office include:
Facilitating communication between Senators and the Senate leadership
Ensuring parliamentary protocol is followed
Maintaining neutrality in politically sensitive matters
The clarification by the Clerk’s office is a critical reminder of the separation of powers within the National Assembly.
By forwarding Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s letter to the Senate leadership rather than intervening, the office reinforced institutional neutrality.
Observers highlight that this case underscores the importance of following hierarchical channels:
Correspondence related to legislative duties must be addressed to the Senate President
Administrative offices cannot pre-empt or influence Senate decisions
Court rulings or fresh Senate resolutions are required for formal resumption
“The Clerk remains guided by the principles of constitutionalism, institutional respect, and the rule of law,” Bi-Allah added.
The handling of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan resumption may set a precedent for future cases involving suspended lawmakers.
Legal and political analysts suggest: Clear procedural guidance reduces confusion and public speculation; Ensures accountability within legislative operations; Protects the independence of both administrative offices and the Senate
By adhering to parliamentary protocol and awaiting judicial clarification, the National Assembly safeguards institutional integrity while allowing due legal processes to unfold.
As the matter remains pending at the Court of Appeal, the Senate retains full authority over any change in the lawmaker’s status.
Any resumption of duties will require either:
1. A fresh Senate resolution formally restoring her rights, or
2. A definitive ruling from the Court of Appeal
Until either occurs, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan resumption cannot legally take place. The public, lawmakers, and legal experts are urged to allow the Senate and courts to act within their constitutional authority.
The National Assembly’s clarification reinforces the distinction between administrative and legislative authority.
By reiterating its impartial role, the Clerk’s office has provided clarity on the procedural requirements surrounding Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan resumption.
The case highlights the critical balance between following parliamentary protocol, adhering to constitutional law, and maintaining institutional neutrality in politically sensitive matters.
Ultimately, the Senate and judiciary remain the sole arbiters in determining the lawmaker’s legislative fate.
About The Author
