Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Lawyers Demand Senate Obey Court Order on Reinstatement

Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Lawyers to Senate: Obey Court Order or Face Legal Consequences

The legal counsel representing Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has called on the Nigerian Senate to immediately comply with a binding judgment of the Federal High Court that declared her suspension unlawful and ordered her reinstatement. The lawyers emphasized that respect for judicial authority and constitutional provisions must prevail over political maneuvering or misinterpretations of legal language. In a formal letter dated July 14, 2025, addressed to the Director of Litigation and Counselling, Legal Services Directorate of the National Assembly, Mr. Charles Yoila, Esq., the legal team, led by the respected Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Michael Jonathan Numa, clarified key aspects of the Federal High Court judgment delivered in the case Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025—Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan v. Clerk of the National Assembly & 3 Others.

The letter, which has since gained wide attention among legal and political observers, meticulously addressed misinterpretations surrounding the wording of the court’s directive, particularly Order 12, which states that “the Senate should recall the Plaintiff.” While some have argued that the use of “should” denotes mere advice or suggestion, the legal team strongly refutes this. According to the legal counsel, when read in full context with the court’s twelve-point enrolled order, the word “should” is part of a binding and enforceable judgment. The legal team emphasized that the court’s ruling not only addressed the substantive dispute, the legality of Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension, but also granted a mandatory injunction that nullified all proceedings and recommendations from the Senate Committee responsible for her suspension. By declaring these findings unconstitutional and inconsistent with the Senate’s own Standing Orders, the court effectively ordered a reinstatement of Senator Natasha’s legislative duties.
The legal team drew attention to Section 287(3) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which mandates “all persons and authorities,” including “the National Assembly,” to comply with decisions of any competent court in Nigeria. They also referenced Section 318, which gives a broad definition of what constitutes a court decision, explicitly including not only judgments and orders but also “recommendations,” which some may wrongly perceive as legally non-binding.

In a carefully worded section of the letter, SAN Michael Jonathan Numa reminded the Legal Directorate that willful disobedience or misinterpretation of a court judgment amounts to contempt of court and, possibly, a violation of constitutional duties. The letter urges the legal arm of the National Assembly to re-examine the judgment thoroughly and advise the Senate accordingly.
The counsel also cited several judicial precedents, notably the Supreme Court’s decision in Ecobank (Nig.) Ltd v. Tempo Energy (Nig.) Ltd (2025), where the apex court ruled that certain judicial “recommendations”—though not phrased in typical mandatory language—were legally binding due to the context and authority of the issuing court.

This issue goes beyond the political career of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. It strikes at the heart of Nigeria’s democratic integrity, testing the Senate’s willingness to uphold the rule of law above internal politics. Natasha, a lawyer, engineer, and gender advocate, has built a reputation as a strong voice for transparency and development in Nigeria’s political landscape. Her suspension earlier this year sparked massive public backlash, with many accusing the Senate of silencing a woman who has consistently challenged the status quo. The judgment of the Federal High Court, therefore, is seen by many as a victory for democratic accountability, not just for Natasha herself.

The legal letter concludes with a declaration of intent: Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan will resume legislative duties on July 22, 2025. That date is not arbitrary. It falls shortly after the passing of former President Muhammadu Buhari, a major national event that has brought renewed focus on the legacies and responsibilities of Nigeria’s political leaders. Her return, if not blocked or delayed further, will mark not just the enforcement of a court ruling but also a symbolic restoration of public confidence in Nigeria’s judiciary and legislature. In her own words, Natasha described the date as “deeply symbolic and aligned with Nigeria’s need for accountable, transparent governance.” She added that if the Senate fails to honor the court’s order by that date, she will explore further legal actions, including contempt proceedings and a return to court for enforcement orders.

The lawsuit filed by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan challenged her suspension from the Senate, which stemmed from allegations investigated by a Senate Committee. Her lawyers argued that the process violated her rights to a fair hearing and that the Senate overreached its constitutional powers by suspending her without proper procedures or evidence.
The court agreed with these submissions, ruling that:

• The suspension was unconstitutional and should be nullified.
• The findings and recommendations of the Senate Committee were invalid;
• A mandatory injunction must be issued for her recall and reinstatement.

This outcome, as legal experts have noted, reinforces the position that even the highest legislative institutions are subject to the Constitution and judicial review. The case has triggered reactions across Nigeria’s political and civic spaces. Supporters of Senator Natasha have hailed the judgment as a landmark win for women in politics, especially in a country where female lawmakers make up less than 7% of the National Assembly. Civil society organizations such as SERAP (Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project) and the Centre for Constitutional Governance have also urged the Senate to obey the judgment immediately, warning that failure to do so would set a dangerous precedent.
Meanwhile, political analysts believe that this development may further polarize the Senate, with some members loyal to Natasha’s political bloc pushing for her immediate return, while others remain silent, possibly waiting for leadership direction.

The National Assembly has limited options in this matter:
1. Comply fully with the court judgment, reinstate Senator Natasha, and allow her to resume duties.
2. Delay implementation under the guise of legal review, risking public backlash and contempt proceedings.
3. Challenge the judgment at the Court of Appeal, but legal experts argue this may be procedurally too late and morally questionable.
The legal team has made it clear that constitutional obedience is not optional. Failure to act in accordance with the judgment could trigger a chain of legal and political consequences, possibly including a judicial summons to Senate leadership or a motion by civil society groups seeking public sanctions.
Other Related News... Criminal Defamation: FG Drags Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan to Court Over Live TV Remarks

Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Legal Team Cries Foul Over Pending Petitions as FG Files Charges: Calls for Justice, Fairness, and Rule of Law
The saga surrounding Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is more than just a legal dispute. It reflects the fragile balance of power between the legislative and judicial arms of government. It is a critical test of whether Nigeria’s lawmakers are willing to be governed by the same Constitution they swore to uphold. As July 22 approaches, all eyes will be on the Senate. Will they demonstrate maturity, legality, and democratic discipline by reinstating Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan in line with the court’s clear ruling? Or will they dig in, risking legal consequences and a loss of public trust? The answer may very well define the tone of Nigeria’s democracy in the years ahead.

By PrimeLineInfo