Abuja Federal High Court sets June 27 for judgment in suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s case challenging her suspension by the Senate

[dropcap]J[/dropcap]ustice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled June 27th as the date for the final judgment in the case brought by the suspended Senator representing Kogi Central, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.

Also read: Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan issues sarcastic apology to senate president Akpabio amid sexual harassment allegations

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan is contesting her suspension from the Senate, an action taken by the upper legislative chamber, led by Senate President Godswill Akpabio, citing alleged misconduct.

The senator believes her suspension was unjust and motivated by bias.

In her legal challenge, Akpoti-Uduaghan has named the National Assembly, the Senate, the Senate President, and Senator Neda Imasuem, who chairs the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Code of Conduct, as the defendants in the suit.

The case was initially presided over by Justice Obiorah Egwuatu, who later recused himself, leading to its reassignment to Justice Binta Nyako.

During the court proceedings on Monday, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal representative, Jibrin Okutekpa, informed the court that all necessary documents had been submitted, in accordance with the court’s previous directives.

Similarly, Paul Daudu and Ekwo Ejembi, the legal counsel representing the Senate and the Senate President, confirmed that they had also filed their respective documents.

However, they raised a point of contention, accusing Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan of disobeying a court order.

“The alleged statement credited to the plaintiff had no connection with her.” – Michael Numan, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s lawyer

Specifically, they alleged that the suspended senator had defied the court by posting a satirical apology directed at the Senate President on her Facebook page on March 27th, and subsequently publishing it in several newspapers.

“The plaintiff had responded to our motion,” the lawyers stated, referring to Akpoti-Uduaghan’s response to the contempt allegations.

Michael Numan, another lawyer representing Akpoti-Uduaghan, acknowledged receipt of the motion accusing his client of contempt.

He also reminded the presiding judge of a similar motion they had previously filed, accusing the defendants of disobeying the court.

Addressing the specific allegation of contempt, Numan argued that “the alleged statement credited to the plaintiff had no connection with her,” and insisted that “the alleged contemptuous statement had no nexus with the plaintiff.”