Samuel Omang
The controversy surrounding Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension took a fresh twist on Tuesday as the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and several Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) condemned the Senate’s decision to bar Akpoti-Uduaghan from resuming her seat when the upper chamber reconvenes on September 23.
In a letter dated September 4, the Acting Clerk of the National Assembly, Dr. Yahaya Danzaria, formally notified Akpoti-Uduaghan that her six-month suspension imposed on March 6 remains in force until the Court of Appeal delivers judgment in her suit against the Senate.
“The matter remains sub judice, and until the judicial process is concluded, no administrative action can be taken to facilitate your resumption. You will be duly notified of the Senate decision on the matter as soon as it is resolved,” the letter stated.
The communication dashed hopes of the Kogi Central lawmaker, who, according to her lawyer, Victor Giwa, had already begun preparations to rejoin her colleagues after serving out the six-month penalty.
Akpoti-Uduaghan was suspended on March 6 after the Senate adopted the report of its Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, which accused her of insubordination for refusing to vacate her assigned seat during plenary. The decision stripped her of salaries, aides, and office privileges.
The senator has consistently maintained that her suspension was politically motivated, linking it to a petition she filed accusing Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment—an allegation the Senate dismissed. She challenged the action in court, announcing in April that she had secured a favorable judgment. However, Senate leadership insisted she would remain suspended for the full six months.
In July, her dramatic attempt to force her way back into the chamber ended in a standoff, as security operatives barred her entry despite protests by her supporters outside the National Assembly.
Reacting to the fresh letter, the PDP accused the Senate leadership of acting in bad faith. In a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Debo Ologunagba, the party described the action as a calculated attempt by the APC-led Senate to stifle opposition voices and deprive the people of Kogi Central of representation.
“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 statement read.
The party alleged that the renewed move was part of a wider “creeping totalitarianism” under the APC-led Federal Government and demanded that the Clerk of the National Assembly withdraw the letter immediately. PDP also linked the development to what it described as Akpabio’s “history of harassment against women,” urging the Senate President to clear himself of allegations rather than “intimidating” a female colleague.
The opposition party further called on the international community, rights groups, and democratic institutions to intervene, insisting that Akpoti-Uduaghan must be allowed to resume.
Senior Advocates of Nigeria said the Senate was overreaching in stopping Akpoti-Uduaghan from resuming her seat after serving her six-month suspension. They argued that awaiting the determination of the court case before allowing Akpoti-Uduaghan to resume was constitutionally wrong and unjustifiable.
Adedayo Adedeji (SAN) argued that it was prudent and constitutionally proper for Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan to be allowed to resume her seat as her suspension period had elapsed. This, he said, would preserve the Senate’s dignity, show respect for its disciplinary powers, and ensure that the people of Kogi Central are not left without representation.
He further highlighted that Section 68 of the 1999 Constitution makes clear that a member can only vacate a seat in circumstances expressly provided by the Constitution, and that temporary suspensions must not be used to deny constituents their right to representation.
Other SANs, including Wale Balogun, Paul Obi, and Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, argued that denying Akpoti-Uduaghan resumption after completing her six-month suspension undermines constitutional democracy and leaves millions of constituents unrepresented. They described the Senate’s stance as overreaching, vindictive, and legally indefensible.
The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) also condemned the Senate’s stance, calling it a “travesty of justice.” The group urged the Senate to immediately allow Akpoti-Uduaghan to resume legislative duties and pay her salary and allowances for the duration of the suspension, stressing that preventing her resumption violated both national and international human rights obligations.
“No one should ever be punished for ‘speaking without permission’. Being a senator does not deprive Mrs. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan of her fundamental human rights,” SERAP said.
The ongoing controversy underscores the tension between legislative authority, constitutional rights, and political rivalry. As the legal process unfolds, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s supporters, legal experts, and civil society groups are calling for immediate respect for democratic norms and the restoration of her rights as an elected representative.