Daniel Otera
The Nigerian Senate has firmly rejected claims that it is under any legal compulsion to reinstate suspended Kogi Central lawmaker, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. This comes in the wake of a Federal High Court judgment that condemned her six-month suspension as unconstitutional but refrained from issuing an enforceable order for her return.
Senate spokesperson Yemi Adaramodu, in a statement released Sunday, clarified that the judgment delivered by Justice Binta Nyako did not compel the Senate to lift the suspension or recall the senator. According to him, “the Certified True Copy of the Enrolled Order did not contain any express or mandatory order directing the recall or reinstatement of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan before the expiration of her suspension.”
The statement followed a letter from the senator’s legal team, led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria Michael Numa, informing the Clerk of the National Assembly of her intention to resume legislative duties on July 15, 2025. The letter referenced the court’s finding that her suspension was excessive, unconstitutional, and a violation of the right of her constituents to representation.
Justice Nyako’s ruling acknowledged that the six-month suspension deprived Kogi Central residents of their right to representation, cautioning that such a long disciplinary action infringes on constitutional principles. However, she stopped short of compelling the Senate to act, instead offering what the Senate has described as “non-binding, advisory observations.”
“The learned judge merely made observations on the length of the suspension, which are not enforceable or binding in law,” Adaramodu said, emphasizing that the Senate’s power to discipline its members remains intact under Section 60 of the 1999 Constitution.
The Senate insists that no part of the judgment invalidated its constitutional right to regulate internal affairs, including disciplinary measures. “Nowhere in the judgment did the court issue a declaratory or injunctive order mandating her recall,” Adaramodu reiterated, adding that the Senate would conduct its own review of the court’s ruling and respond in a manner consistent with its constitutional role.
While the Senate distances itself from any immediate obligation to reinstate the senator, the court did find her in civil contempt for a satirical social media post that appeared to ridicule the judicial process. Justice Nyako imposed a ₦5 million fine and directed her to publish public apologies in two national newspapers and on her Facebook page within seven days.
Some media sources confirmed that the court viewed her actions as undermining judicial authority but stopped short of sentencing her to a custodial term.
Legal experts have pointed to Section 4(8) of the Constitution, which provides that the exercise of legislative powers is subject to judicial review. However, they also note that while courts can rule on constitutional breaches, they cannot direct internal legislative decisions unless those decisions expressly violate the Constitution.
The case has reignited debate over legislative suspensions in Nigeria, a tool often wielded against lawmakers accused of misconduct or dissent. Between 2019 and 2024, at least thirteen lawmakers—five senators and eight House members—faced suspensions ranging from a few weeks to six months. The average suspension duration was three months, often leaving entire constituencies without representation.
Reports published on other sources in March 2025 highlighted the troubling implications: “In each case, constituents were left without representation for the period of suspension. This raises serious constitutional questions about disenfranchisement.”
Past suspensions have drawn court intervention but not without complications. In 2017, Senator Ali Ndume’s six-month suspension was nullified by a court. A year later, the judiciary declared Senator Ovie Omo-Agege’s 90-day suspension unconstitutional. Similarly, in 2016, the House of Representatives suspended Abdulmumin Jibrin for 180 legislative days after he alleged budget padding. The court later ordered his reinstatement. In 2024, Senator Abdul Ningi faced a three-month suspension over accusations of budget distortion—an action that remains unresolved.
The pattern suggests that while courts may frown upon long suspensions, no lawmaker has been reinstated solely by judicial decree. In each case, legislative action was still necessary to formalize the return.
This ongoing standoff underscores the tension between judicial oversight and parliamentary autonomy. It also reaffirms the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers—courts may interpret and advise, but cannot dictate legislative operations unless constitutional breaches are clearly established.
As of press time, the Senate had yet to announce any formal sitting to consider Justice Nyako’s ruling or to determine whether Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension would be lifted before its expiration.