Once upon a time in the hallowed chambers of the Nigerian Senate, where oratory often trumps logic and “ayes” have a suspicious tendency to outnumber “nays,” a certain Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan found herself at the heart of a controversy.
Her crime? A flagrant disobedience to Senate rules. Armed with a voice unwavering in its agitation, albeit sometimes echoing distorted facts, she waged a battle that exposed the complexities of legislative decorum.
Akpoti-Uduaghan, a lawyer by training, strode into the Red Chamber on February 20 with the fiery determination of an activist who had yet to appreciate the finer nuances of legislative rules.
She soon discovered, to her horror, that unlike the courtroom where she could cite the Constitution and expect compliance, the Senate was governed by a different beast: its own rule book.
Read also: Trefoil Guild Nigeria weighs into Natasha-Akpabio saga, stands against sexual assault
The beginning of Natasha’s ordeal
Her trouble began with a dramatic confrontation on Thursday, February 20, as she clashed with Senate President Godswill Akpabio over a seating arrangement dispute.
The altercation began when Senator Natasha discovered that her seat had been reassigned upon resumption of the session.
Refusing to comply with the new arrangement, she challenged the decision, sparking a heated exchange.
Tahir Monguno, Chief Whip, raised a point of order, referencing sections of the Senate rule book to justify the reassignment.
He stated that the changes were necessary due to a shift in the Senate’s composition following the movement of some opposition members to the majority wing.
According to Monguno, such adjustments fall within the constitutional prerogative of the Senate President.
“Failure to comply with the new seating arrangement,” Monguno warned, “could lead to penalties, including being barred from participating in Senate discussions.”
But instead of navigating the murky waters of parliamentary procedure, she plunged headfirst, shouting Order 10 on privileges. Order 10 states:
“Any Senator may rise at any time to speak upon a matter of Privilege suddenly arising, and he shall be prepared to move, without Notice, a motion declaring that a contempt or breach of privilege has been committed, or referring the matter to the Committee on Ethics and Privileges, but if the matter is raised in Committee of the Whole Senate, the Chairman shall leave the Chair to report progress.”
However, Order 6, Section ii, explicitly states: “A Senator may only speak from the seat allocated to him, provided the Senate President may change the allocation from time to time.”
Similarly, Section i of Order 6 states, “The Senate President may allocate a seat to a senator.” Having flouted Order 6, her invocation of Order 10 could not be taken from a seat not assigned to her.
Sexual harassment allegation
Sexual harassment is a grave offence and one that should ignite concern, especially given the ‘supposed’ pedigree of the Red Chamber.
However, the Kogi-Central lawmaker erred in handling the case.
The first time the case was mentioned in public was on a television station.
Following Akpoti-Uduaghan’s February 28 broadcast, Ekaette Akpabio filed two lawsuits against her for defamation and violating her fundamental rights.
Filed before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, the lawsuits stem from sexual harassment allegations made by Akpoti-Uduaghan during an interview on Arise News.
In the fundamental rights suit (Suit No: CV/814/25), Mrs. Akpabio argues that Natasha Akpoti’s statements amount to a “flagrant violation” of her fundamental rights as guaranteed by the Nigerian Constitution and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
Additionally, in a separate defamation lawsuit (Suit No: CV/816/25), the Senate President’s wife challenges the claim that her husband made sexual advances toward Natasha.
After the case was taken to court, Akpoti-Uduaghan brought a petition alleging sexual harassment before the Senate President; a belated move that contravened Senate rules.
The provision of Rule 52(5) of the Senate Standing Order states: “Reference shall not be made to any matter on which a judicial decision is pending, in such a way as might, in the opinion of the President of the Senate, prejudice the interest of parties thereto.”
By taking the matter to the Senate while it was still before the court, Akpoti-Uduaghan breached this rule.
Contempt of Court
Akpoti-Uduaghan has filed a contempt suit against the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, and others over her six-month suspension without pay from the Senate.
The lawsuit, filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja, also names the Clerk of the National Assembly and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Code of Conduct, Senator Neda Imasuen.
Justice Obiora Egwuatu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, on March 4, restrained the Senate Committee from proceeding with any investigation against Akpoti-Uduaghan.
However, Senate Rule 52(8) states:
“Such actions must be actually pending and not commenced in court when the Senate had already received, deliberated or considered the matter.”
This implies that in a bid to stop her suspension, Akpoti-Uduaghan violated Senate rules by taking a matter already before a committee to the court.
The Senate’s power to punish
Akpoti-Uduaghan was slammed with a six-month suspension following the submission of a report by the Senate Committee on Ethics, Code of Conduct, and Public Petitions.
Critics have condemned the suspension, questioning the Senate’s power to suspend a member for more than 14 days.
However, the rule book states:
Publication of certain statements and writings an offence
(1) Any person who:
(a) publishes any statement, whether in writing or otherwise, which falsely or scandalously defames a Legislative House or any committee thereof;
(b) publishes any writing reflecting on the character of the President or Speaker;
(c) publishes any writing containing a gross, willful, or scandalous misrepresentation of the proceedings of a Legislative House; Shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine or imprisonment.
The rule further states:
“Where any member is guilty of contempt of a Legislative House, the House may by resolution reprimand such member or suspend him from the service of the House for such period as it may determine.”
The Curious Case of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU)
Refusing to back down, she took her case to the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), hoping to find solace in its international embrace.
However, IPU’s statutes emphasize the protection of parliamentary members against arbitrary suspension—not individual representation.
A quick check on the IPU website lists countries, not individuals, as members.
Natasha interrupted an IPU session debating women’s representation to bring forward her allegations before the United Nations.
Again, she was not the designated delegate for Nigeria at the meeting and had no official approval from the Jimoh Ibrahim, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Inter-Parliamentary Relations.
What Natasha missed: The Devil in the details
Perhaps, the most tragic part of Natasha’s ordeal is that she did not lack a valid argument, only the right tools to make it stick.
If she had relied on Section 39 of the Nigerian Constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression, she could have built a stronger defense. Or if she had studied Section 60, which grants the Senate the power to regulate its own procedure, she might have crafted a more tactical approach.
Read also: Kingibe to advocate for Natasha Akpoti case if formally filed in Senate
Instead, she underestimated the parliamentary beast, assuming that emotion and passion would suffice where political maneuvering was king.
She played chess with checkers’ rules and, unsurprisingly, lost.
As Natasha continues her legal and political battles, the Senate moves on, undisturbed by the cries of outrage from her supporters.
The lesson? Passion is admirable, but in the labyrinthine world of Nigerian politics, knowing the rules is the only way to win the game.
And so, as she prepares for her return, one can only hope that Natasha, lawyer and activist though she may be, takes a crash course in legislative survival.
After all, in the Senate, it’s not just about being right—it’s about being right the right way.
Join BusinessDay whatsapp Channel, to stay up to date
Open In Whatsapp
