By Abdul Lauya
The Nigerian Senate has officially filed an appeal challenging the judgment of the Federal High Court in Abuja, which earlier declared the suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan unconstitutional and ordered her immediate reinstatement.
The Senate, through its President, Senator Godswill Akpabio, filed an 11-ground appeal at the Court of Appeal, disputing the jurisdiction of the lower court and seeking to set aside the July 4 ruling that described the suspension as “an affront to democratic representation.”
The legal action follows the Senate’s visible reluctance to act on the court order. Despite growing public pressure and condemnation from civil society groups, the upper chamber had earlier insisted the judgment was merely “advisory,” not enforceable.
This assertion drew criticism from legal experts, who argued that no court ruling is ever advisory unless explicitly declared so by statute.
In its editorial published this morning titled “Does 180-Day Absence Threaten Natasha’s Senate Seat?”, Eye Reporters argued that Senator Natasha’s situation is more than a legal standoff, it is “a constitutional stress test.” The piece emphasized that the 1999 Constitution does not set a 180-day calendar threshold, but rather limits absences to one-third of sitting days without just cause, roughly 60 to 65 sessions.
The editorial noted that Natasha’s absence may be both involuntary and justified, as it stems from legal battles and the Senate’s refusal to honor a valid court ruling. “To declare her seat vacant now, while simultaneously refusing to obey a court order recalling her,” the editorial warns, “would not just be a contradiction; it would be a constitutional paradox.”
The Senate’s appeal, while a legitimate legal right, is seen by some observers as a tactic to delay compliance until the expiration of Senator Natasha’s constitutionally protected absence limit.
Legal analysts point out that if the Senate can keep the matter in court until November, it may then argue her prolonged absence constitutes grounds to permanently vacate her seat.
Meanwhile, Senator Natasha, representing Kogi Central, has vowed to fight to reclaim her mandate, describing her suspension as “a clear attempt to silence dissenting voices, especially those of women in politics.”
The political undertone of the crisis cannot be overlooked. Senator Natasha, a fiery opposition voice in a chamber dominated by the ruling party, has frequently clashed with the leadership over key policy matters.
Her suspension in February, ostensibly over a heated floor exchange, was widely seen as excessive and prompted outcry from human rights groups and international observers.
As the legal tug-of-war continues, one question looms large: can the Senate, as a creature of the Constitution, ignore the courts while claiming to uphold the rule of law?
If the appellate court upholds the lower court’s judgment, the Senate may be compelled to act swiftly, or risk being seen as contemptuous of the judiciary. But if it succeeds in overturning the ruling or dragging out the process, it may set a precedent that weakens judicial oversight of legislative conduct.
For now, the battle for Kogi Central’s Senate seat has moved from the floor of the Red Chamber to the courtroom, with implications for the balance of power in Nigeria’s fragile democracy.
For advert placement and inquiries, publication of press releases, and news coverages, please call: Phone: 08052898434 Email: editor@eyereporters.com, click here to view the advert rates.