The suspension of Kogi Central senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has raised legal debates within Nigeria’s political space.
With past judicial rulings against prolonged suspensions, her case raises important questions about the limits of the Senate’s disciplinary powers, the protection of lawmakers’ rights, and the broader implications for democratic governance.
|
|
Context and grounds for suspension
On 6 March, the Senate voted to suspend Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months based on the recommendations of its Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions.
The committee cited her refusal to adhere to the Senate’s sitting arrangement and alleged misconduct during a plenary session on 20 February as the primary reasons for her suspension.
|
|
|
|---|
The Senate, however, left room for an early recall if she tenders a written apology.
Apart from suspending Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months, the upper chamber also withdrew her security aides, locked her Senate office, suspended her salary and allowances, and banned her from entering the National Assembly premises.
Critics questioned whether her punishment was merely a disciplinary action or a politically motivated attempt to silence her.
Pattern of suspension of senators in Nigeria
The Senate has a history of disciplining members, often under contentious circumstances
Femi Okurounmu, then Ogun Central senator, was suspended in 1999 for alleging that some senators were plotting to impeach then-President Olusegun Obasanjo. He was later reinstated after an apology.
Joseph Waku, a senator from Benue State, was suspended in 2000 after suggesting that a military coup might be preferable to the Olusegun Obasanjo presidency. The statement was deemed anti-democratic and inciting.
Arthur Nzeribe, a senator from Imo State, was suspended in 2002 after being accused of a ₦22 million fraud.
Isah Mohammed, then a Niger South senator, was suspended in 2004 for two weeks after physically assaulting a fellow senator, Iyabo Anisulowo, in a dispute reportedly over committee funds.
Borno South Senator Ali Ndume was suspended for six months in 2017 after calling for an investigation into allegations involving then-Senate President Bukola Saraki and former Kogi West Senator, Dino Melaye.
Ovie Omo-Agege was suspended in 2018 over the amendment of the Electoral Act, but he challenged the suspension in court. Mr Omo-Agege, the then Delta Central senator, later rose to the position of deputy senate president in the 9th Assembly.
Bauchi Central Senator Abdul Ningi was suspended for three months in 2024 after alleging that the 2024 federal budget was padded by over ₦3 trillion.
The pattern shows that suspensions in the Senate are often politically motivated, affecting senators who annoy the leadership of the upper legislative chamber or the executive arm of government.
Legal precedents and court rulings on legislative suspensions
The Nigerian Constitution guarantees the right of elected representatives to participate in legislative duties without undue hindrance. Past judicial decisions have consistently ruled against prolonged suspensions, based on the principle that legislative discipline must not override constitutional rights.
In 2017, the Federal High Court in Abuja ruled that the six-month suspension of Mr Ndume was “illegal, unlawful, and unconstitutional.” The court thereafter, ordered the Senate to pay all outstanding salaries and allowances.
Similarly, in 2018, the Federal High Court in Abuja also ruled that the Senate lacked the power to suspend Mr Omo-Agege beyond 14 days on the grounds that suspension must be proportionate and not disenfranchise constituents.
In 2018, the Federal High Court in Abuja also nullified the suspension of a member of the House of Representatives, Abdulmumin Jibrin, on the basis that it was an “abuse of democracy”.
These rulings indicate that Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan has strong legal grounds to challenge her suspension, especially since it exceeds the 14-day limit suggested by past rulings.
However, she may not rely on a Senate order to argue her case because it does not set a time limit for a senator’s suspension.
Order 66 (8) states that “If a Senator be suspended under the provisions of this rule, he shall be directed by the President of the Senate to withdraw. His suspension shall last until determined by the Senate.”
She may, however, rely on Section 21(2) of the Legislative Houses, which prescribes a maximum of 14 and a minimum of one legislative day for suspension of members.
Analysing Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension constitutionally
Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension, if not lifted by the Senate or quashed by the court, will effectively deny the people of Kogi Central representation in the Senate for six months. This is against multiple court rulings that suspensions should not punish the electorate.
The additional penalties, such as withdrawal of security aides and closure of office are unprecedented and arguably unconstitutional.
Similar past suspensions did not involve such extreme measures.
READ ALSO: Court lifts injunction on Senate’s disciplinary process against Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan
Her suspension comes amid conflict with the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio. Although the ethics committee dismissed her petition of alleged sexual harassment against Mr Akpabio, the suspension raises questions of political retaliation.
Potential legal and political outcomes
If Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan challenges her suspension in court, it is likely to be overturned based on legal precedents. The courts may rule that the Senate exceeded its disciplinary authority and that the suspension violates constitutional rights.
If the court rules in her favour, this would further define the limits of disciplinary actions within the Senate.
Alternatively, the Senate has left the option for her to submit a written apology. If she chooses this route, she may regain her seat before the six-month period elapses.
However, this could set a dangerous precedent, where senators are pressured into submission rather than standing by their principles.
