The Abuja Division of the Court of Appeal has upheld the decision of the Senate to suspend Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, ruling that the Red Chamber acted strictly within the ambit of its constitutional and procedural powers.
In a unanimous judgment delivered on Monday, February 9, 2029, by a three-member panel of justices, the appellate court dismissed Akpoti-Uduaghan’s appeal against the Clerk of the National Assembly and three other respondents in suit number CA/ABJ/CV/1107/2025, holding that her suspension did not infringe on her parliamentary privileges or violate any provision of the Constitution.
The court affirmed that the Senate possesses the authority to discipline its members where its internal rules are breached, stressing that such disciplinary measures, including suspension, fall squarely within the legislature’s powers of self-regulation.
However, while upholding the suspension, the appellate court partially allowed the appeal by overturning the contempt proceedings and the ₦5 million fine imposed on the Kogi lawmaker over a satirical apology she had addressed to the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio.
The court held that the punitive measures exceeded the scope of permissible legislative sanctions in the circumstances of the case.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice A. B. Muhammed ruled that the Senate President acted in accordance with the Senate Standing Rules when he declined to recognise Akpoti-Uduaghan during plenary on February 20, 2025, noting that she was not seated in her officially designated seat at the time.
The court explained that under the Senate Rules, lawmakers are required to speak only from their allotted seats, adding that the Senate President is vested with the authority to reassign seats when necessary in the interest of order and effective legislative proceedings.
According to the appellate court, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s failure to comply with the seating arrangement justified the presiding officer’s action, and did not amount to a denial of her right to be heard or a breach of her constitutional privileges as a senator.
The judgment reinforces the principle of legislative autonomy, affirming that courts will not interfere with the internal affairs of the National Assembly so long as its actions remain within the bounds of the law and established parliamentary procedures.
