Appeal Court Upholds Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Suspension, Senate Says Ruling Affirms Legislative Authority

 

The Senate has welcomed the judgment of the Court of Appeal affirming the suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, describing the decision as a strong endorsement of the National Assembly’s constitutional powers to discipline its members.

Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Senator Yemi Adaramodu, said the appellate court ruling reinforces the upper chamber’s internal disciplinary structure and strengthens the principle of separation of powers.

The Court of Appeal, in a unanimous decision delivered by a three-member panel on Monday, held that the Senate acted within its constitutional mandate when it suspended the Kogi Central lawmaker over alleged misconduct. The court ruled that her parliamentary privileges and fundamental rights were not violated by the action taken against her.

Reacting to the judgment, Adaramodu said the verdict clearly establishes that the legislature retains autonomy over its internal affairs and disciplinary processes.

According to him, the court confirmed that the Senate’s authority to sanction erring members is constitutionally protected and can only be challenged where there is a clear breach of constitutional or statutory provisions.

He noted that the ruling also clarified the scope of fundamental rights within legislative proceedings, stressing that disciplinary measures validly imposed by the Senate do not amount to a violation of such rights when due process under Senate rules is followed.

Adaramodu added that the judgment underscores judicial restraint in legislative matters, stating that courts would not interfere in the internal operations of parliament except where there is convincing evidence of constitutional violation.

Background

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan had earlier approached the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking to restrain the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions from initiating disciplinary proceedings against her.

On March 4, the trial court granted an ex parte order stopping the Senate from proceeding with disciplinary action and directed the defendants to show cause within 72 hours why an interlocutory injunction should not be issued.

Despite the order, the Senate proceeded to suspend the senator for six months over alleged gross misconduct following the adoption of the ethics committee’s report.

Subsequently, the Federal High Court vacated the restraining order on March 19. The presiding judge later recused himself from the case after allegations of bias were raised, and the matter was reassigned to another judge.

In a later judgment delivered on July 4, Justice Binta Nyako held that legislative privileges are subject to Senate rules. The court affirmed the power of the Senate President to enforce seating arrangements and plenary procedures, ruling that the senator was rightly denied the floor when she was not in her designated seat.

However, the court described the six-month suspension as excessive and overreaching. It also found the lawmaker guilty of contempt over a satirical apology she published in relation to the Senate leadership.