The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday adjourned till Tuesday, 13 May for the definite hearing of the contempt claims made against the suspended Senator representing Kogi Central Senatorial District, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, by Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
Justice Binta Nyako fixed the date following a submission by the second and third defendants, who informed the court that they had filed an application drawing attention to the plaintiff’s alleged contempt.
The legal dispute between Akpabio and Akpoti-Uduaghan originated from a disagreement over seating arrangements during plenary on 20 February.
Subsequently, Akpoti-Uduaghan, during a television programme where she appeared as a guest, made allegations of sexual harassment against Akpabio.
Following the fallout, Akpoti-Uduaghan approached the Federal High Court seeking an order to restrain the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions from investigating her.
In an ex parte motion marked FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025, she sued the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Senate, the Senate President, and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, Senator Nedamwen Imasuen.
On 4 March, the court issued an order restraining the Senate from commencing disciplinary proceedings against Akpoti-Uduaghan following her ex parte application.
However, on 6 March, the Senate proceeded to suspend her, citing a report by the committee alleging gross misconduct, despite the matter being sub judice.
On Friday, 4 April, 2025, Justice Nyako ordered Akpoti-Uduaghan, Akpabio, the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Senate, and Imasuen to refrain from granting media interviews or making social media posts related to the case while it remained pending before the court.
This order followed claims by Akpabio’s counsel that Akpoti-Uduaghan had been granting press interviews despite the court’s directive.
At the resumed sitting on Monday, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal team, led by Jibrin Okutekpa, informed the court that the matter was fixed for hearing and that all required documents had been filed.
Charles Yoila appeared for the first defendant; Paul Daudu represented the second defendant; Ekoh Ejembi (SAN) for the third defendant; and Valentine Offia for the fourth defendant.
All defence lawyers confirmed compliance with the court’s previous orders and readiness for the hearing.
However, Daudu informed the court that despite the order against social media posts, the plaintiff had published a satirical post on her Facebook page.
‘This matter is coming up for definite hearing. The second defendant has filed its schedule of hearing. Ordinarily, we are ready to proceed, but a further affidavit was served on me just on Friday, which I am entitled to respond to.
‘This court ordered that there should be no social media posts, but there was one. The plaintiff herself posted a satirical apology on her Facebook page,’ Daudu said.
He argued that the post mocked the court and violated its order, urging the court to hold her in contempt.
Akpabio’s counsel, Ejembi, supported Daudu’s submission, stating that the plaintiff’s Facebook post undermined the court’s authority.
‘We are alleging that the Facebook post made by the plaintiff is a mockery of the court’s proceedings. We tender a Punch newspaper report showing she made the post despite the court’s order’, Ejembi said.
In response, the plaintiff’s counsel maintained that the Facebook post was related to the sexual harassment allegation and not the issue before the court.
Okutekpa urged the court to disregard the defendants’ submissions and proceed with hearing the substantive matter.
‘Our counter-affidavit concerns only the matter before the court. The satirical post has no connection to it’, he argued.
He also urged the court to fast-track the hearing, noting that Akpoti-Uduaghan had spent 68 cumulative days out of the National Assembly.
Justice Nyako, however, insisted that the contempt issue must be addressed first.
‘I cannot proceed with this matter until I conclude on the issue of contempt. If there is contempt, I have to hear and determine it first’, she said.
In turn, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s counsel raised a contempt allegation against all the defendants.
‘My Lord, you have paused this trial over a contempt allegation. We also have an issue of contempt against all the defendants’, he said.
Justice Nyako cautioned the lawyers, warning that continued disobedience of court orders by their clients could lead to consequences.
‘I have the power to summon all your clients to appear in court. If counsel or litigants disobey the court, then the court has no business hearing them—that is my position’, she said.
Addressing Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal team, she added, ‘If you have an application for contempt, bring it forward so the court can hear it’.
She added, ‘You cannot allow your client to disrespect this court. If they are found in contempt, they will face punishment. If not, the court will proceed’.
