A heated constitutional standoff has erupted at the National Assembly, where Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, representing Kogi Central Senatorial District, was denied entry into the Senate chambers. Despite a Federal High Court ruling nullifying her six-month suspension, the Senate leadership has refused to comply, sparking a fresh crisis.
Her attempt to enter the chambers was met with a significant deployment of security personnel.
On July 4, 2025, Justice Binta Nyako delivered a verdict declaring Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension unconstitutional and excessive, mandating her reinstatement. The senator had formally notified the Senate of her intention to resume duties on Tuesday, July 22, but was met with a heavy security presence at the National Assembly gate.
Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Reaction
Speaking to journalists at the National Assembly gate, Akpoti-Uduaghan expressed her resolve to reclaim her seat.
“It’s unfortunate that we got in today, which is the 22nd of July, 2025, having duly notified the Senate through two letters that I will be resuming functions today.
“It’s about me and a duly elected senator walking into the chambers to resume my constituted duties as I was elected and mandated by the good people of Kogi Central and INEC,” she stated, emphasising her mandate from her constituents.
“I’m disappointed on two grounds,” Akpoti-Uduaghan stated. “One is the number of armed policemen that we met outside, all well-kitted with guns, who charged at a female senator who is unarmed. The second thing is the fact that the Senate, under the leadership of Akpabio, has decided to become lawbreakers, and by denying entrance into the chambers to resume my team.”
Addressing what she described as attempts to “twist a narrative” by the Senate’s team, Akpoti-Uduaghan clarified the legal implications of the court’s decision.
Citing Section 318 of the 1999 Nigerian Constitution, she explained that a court’s “decision” encompasses more than just an “order,” including judicial decrees, sentences, convictions, and recommendations.
She argued that even if the court’s pronouncement was termed a “recommendation,” it remained a binding judicial decision.
Further buttressing her point, she referenced Section 287, Subsection 3 of the 1999 Constitution, which explicitly states that “decisions… of any court” are binding on “every authority.”
Akpoti-Uduaghan also claimed that the Senate had appealed the judgment.
Displaying a document to journalists, she clarified, “It is clear that it is not the National Assembly, nor is it the Senate. It’s [Senator Akpabio] himself… The National Assembly has not appealed that judgment. The Senate has not appealed the judgment.”
She further revealed that Senator Akpabio had joined the National Assembly, the Senate, and the Ethics Committee as respondents in his appeal, implying a legal conflict within the Senate leadership itself.
