Senate President Godswill Akpabio has filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal in Abuja, seeking to overturn a Federal High Court ruling that ordered the recall of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan to the Senate. The appeal, dated July 14, 2025, challenges the ruling on 11 grounds and raises constitutional questions about the limits of judicial intervention in legislative matters.
The legal dispute stems from suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025 filed by Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan to contest her controversial six-month suspension from the Senate. On July 4, Justice Binta Nyako nullified the suspension, describing it as excessive and lacking legal basis. The ruling prompted Akpabio to initiate an appeal, accusing the trial court of judicial overreach.
Akpabio argues that the Federal High Court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit, asserting that the matter concerned internal parliamentary procedures that fall exclusively within the purview of the National Assembly.
His legal team contends that the suspension of lawmakers is a legislative function shielded from judicial interference under Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution and the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act. Akpabio further faulted the court’s dismissal of his preliminary objection, insisting that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan failed to exhaust internal dispute resolution channels—particularly through the Senate’s Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions—before seeking judicial remedy.
The appeal also challenges the lower court’s decision to entertain issues allegedly not presented by either party, including the conclusion that the suspension was “excessive” and the recommendation that Akpoti-Uduaghan be reinstated. Akpabio argues that such findings amount to unsolicited judicial advice and infringe on the independence of the legislature.
A significant part of the appeal hinges on procedural technicalities. Akpabio alleges that the trial judge improperly merged reliefs sought in interlocutory applications with those in the substantive suit, leading to duplication and procedural confusion, and thereby undermining his right to a fair hearing.
Another key issue raised in the appeal is the alleged non-compliance with Section 21 of the Legislative Houses (Powers and Privileges) Act, which mandates a three-month written notice to the Clerk of the National Assembly before initiating legal proceedings. Akpabio maintains that Akpoti-Uduaghan failed to fulfill this statutory condition, thereby stripping the court of jurisdiction.
In his prayers before the appellate court, Akpabio is seeking:
An order setting aside the High Court’s ruling dismissing his preliminary objection;
A reversal of the finding that the six-month suspension was excessive;
Nullification of the recommendation for Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s recall;
Striking out of duplicated reliefs across both interlocutory and substantive applications; and
Dismissal of the entire suit for lack of jurisdiction.
The appeal also takes issue with what it describes as the trial court’s “advisory opinion” on internal Senate disciplinary processes, branding it an unconstitutional intrusion into legislative autonomy.
Legal analysts suggest the case could reignite debate over the separation of powers in Nigeria’s constitutional framework. The growing number of lawsuits filed by lawmakers over disciplinary actions taken by their chambers continues to test the boundaries between judicial review and legislative privilege.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan has not yet issued a formal response to the appeal. However, legal observers note that the outcome of the case could set a precedent on the limits of judicial power over parliamentary affairs.
As the Court of Appeal prepares to hear the matter, the legal and political community will be watching closely to see whether it affirms the lower court’s intervention or sides with Akpabio in defense of legislative independence.
