Akpabio Heads To Supreme Court To Challenge Appeal Court Ruling On Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Suspension

Weeks after he disclosed that he had withdrawn all defamation cases following a New Year homily that touched him, Senate President Godswill Akpabio has approached the Supreme Court to challenge Court of Appeal decisions arising from the controversy over the suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan from legislative duties.

Court documents show that Akpabio, acting in his capacity as President of the Senate, filed fresh processes at the apex court seeking to regularise and sustain his appeal following adverse rulings at the appellate court.

The suit, filed at the Supreme Court in Abuja, lists Akpabio as the appellant, with Akpoti-Uduaghan; the Clerk of the National Assembly; the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Senator Neda Imasuen, named as respondents.

The dispute originated from a Senate plenary session in February 2025, during which Akpoti-Uduaghan raised issues bordering on parliamentary privilege and alleged procedural irregularities. The matter was referred to the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, a process that culminated in her suspension from legislative activities.

Challenging the action, the Kogi Central senator approached the Federal High Court in Abuja, alleging violations of her constitutional right to fair hearing and non-compliance with the Senate Standing Orders. In a judgment delivered on July 4, 2025, the court examined issues relating to parliamentary privilege, internal legislative procedures and the scope of judicial intervention in legislative affairs.

The matter later moved to the Court of Appeal where, in November 2025, the court struck out Akpabio’s brief of argument, describing it as “incurably defective” for exceeding the 35-page limit and failing to comply with formatting requirements.

It also declined his application to file an amended brief, proceeded to hear the appeal, awarded N100,000 in costs to Akpoti-Uduaghan and effectively upheld the lower court’s finding that the six-month suspension was excessive and unconstitutional.

In the fresh application before the Supreme Court, brought pursuant to the Supreme Court Rules, the Supreme Court Act and relevant provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Akpabio is seeking an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal, leave to appeal on grounds of mixed law and fact, and an order deeming his notice of appeal and brief of argument as properly filed and served.

He argued that the appeal raises substantial constitutional and procedural issues deserving the attention of the apex court, insisting that the Senate acted within its powers under Section 60 of the Constitution, which authorises the National Assembly to regulate its own procedure.

Akpabio’s legal team further contended that a presiding officer of the Senate is not mandatorily required to immediately rule on every point of privilege raised during plenary and that the Senate lawfully activated its internal disciplinary mechanisms in response to what it described as disorderly conduct.

In the court processes, Akpabio urged the justices to prioritise substantive justice over technicalities, stating: “The courts have consistently held that rules of court are handmaids of justice. Thus, procedural rules must yield to constitutional imperatives whenever strict compliance would result in injustice or denial of fair hearing.”

He added that the refusal of the appeal “will not only amount to a breach of his right to a fair hearing, which is constitutionally guaranteed, but also amount to an imbalance in hearing opportunities,” urging the court to set aside the ruling of the Court of Appeal.

Akpoti-Uduaghan has consistently maintained that her suspension was unlawful, excessive, and carried out in violation of her right to a fair hearing, insisting that the Senate failed to comply with its own Standing Orders before referring her to the ethics committee and imposing sanctions.

Her media office confirmed that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal counsel was formally served with the Supreme Court processes on Wednesday, January 21, 2026, effectively joining issues and paving the way for a full legal contest at the apex court.

The case also includes a related contempt proceeding arising from a social media post made by the senator during the pendency of the suit. The Federal High Court had ruled that the post violated a subsisting restraining order, imposed a fine, and ordered a public apology, a decision Akpoti-Uduaghan has also challenged on appeal, arguing that the alleged contempt was criminal in nature and required strict compliance with statutory procedures.