Senate President Godswill Akpabio submitted legal documents to the Court of Appeal in Abuja on July 14, challenging a Federal High Court decision that favored suspended lawmaker Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. Justice Binta Nyako had ruled on July 4 that the six-month suspension of the Kogi Central senator exceeded appropriate disciplinary measures. The judge determined that Akpoti-Uduaghan's suspension violated her constituents' fundamental right to legislative representation. The court imposed a five-million-naira penalty on the senator for contempt related to a Facebook post made during proceedings. Both parties have initiated separate appeals addressing different aspects of the original ruling.
Akpabio's legal team constructed an eleven-point challenge questioning the Federal High Court's authority over internal Senate affairs. The appeal contends that parliamentary procedures fall under legislative immunity protections established by the Legislative Houses' Powers and Privileges Act. His attorneys argue that Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution prevents judicial intervention in matters concerning Senate disciplinary actions and internal operations. The filing maintains that Akpoti-Uduaghan failed to utilize required internal dispute resolution mechanisms before pursuing court action. Akpabio seeks a complete reversal of the lower court judgment and restoration of the original suspension.
Akpoti-Uduaghan responded with her separate appeal targeting the contempt charge on jurisdictional grounds. She argues the trial court overstepped its authority by addressing conduct that occurred outside the courtroom environment. The suspended senator maintains that federal courts lack proper jurisdiction over such matters. Akpabio's cross-appeal reinforces arguments about judicial overreach into legislative branch autonomy. The appellate court will determine whether parliamentary discipline remains beyond external judicial review.
Akpabio's legal team constructed an eleven-point challenge questioning the Federal High Court's authority over internal Senate affairs. The appeal contends that parliamentary procedures fall under legislative immunity protections established by the Legislative Houses' Powers and Privileges Act. His attorneys argue that Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution prevents judicial intervention in matters concerning Senate disciplinary actions and internal operations. The filing maintains that Akpoti-Uduaghan failed to utilize required internal dispute resolution mechanisms before pursuing court action. Akpabio seeks a complete reversal of the lower court judgment and restoration of the original suspension.
Akpoti-Uduaghan responded with her separate appeal targeting the contempt charge on jurisdictional grounds. She argues the trial court overstepped its authority by addressing conduct that occurred outside the courtroom environment. The suspended senator maintains that federal courts lack proper jurisdiction over such matters. Akpabio's cross-appeal reinforces arguments about judicial overreach into legislative branch autonomy. The appellate court will determine whether parliamentary discipline remains beyond external judicial review.
