The federal high court in Abuja has issued an order preventing the senate committee on ethics, privileges, and public petitions from proceeding with disciplinary actions against Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
Obiora Egwuatu, the presiding judge, granted the order on Tuesday following an ex parte application submitted by Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal representatives, the senator representing Kogi central.
Akpoti-Uduaghan was summoned to appear before the senate’s disciplinary committee after a confrontation with Senate President Godswill Akpabio on February 20.
The senator disrupted plenary proceedings by rejecting her designated seat, disregarding Akpabio’s directive, and persistently raising a point of order despite being overruled.
The senate later referred Akpoti-Uduaghan to the committee on ethics, privileges, and public petitions for a disciplinary review.
On February 28, during an interview on Arise TV, the senator claimed that her ordeal in the senate started after she rejected “sexual advances from the senate president”.
NULL AND VOID’
The legal team representing Akpoti-Uduaghan includes Sanusi Musa, M. J. Numa, Y. M. Zakari, B. J. Tabai, Tijanni Jimol, and M. C. Bekee.
The defendants in the suit are clerk of the national assembly, the senate, senate president, and chairman of the senate committee on ethics.
According to court documents obtained by TheCable, Akpoti-Uduaghan requested the court to issue an order stopping the senate and the ethics committee from “proceeding with the purported investigation” against her.
She further asked the court to declare that any action taken during the pendency of the suit is “null, void and of no effect whatsoever”.
Additionally, Akpoti-Uduaghan sought permission for the defendants to be served with the originating summons and related documents through substituted means.
“AN ORDER OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT granting an Interim Injunction restraining the 2nd Defendant/Defendant’s Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Code of Conduct headed by the 4th Defendant from proceeding with the purported investigation against the Plaintiff/Applicant for alleged misconduct sequel to the events that occurred at the plenary of the 2nd Defendant on the 20th day of February, 2025, pursuant to the referral by the 2nd Defendant on 25th February, 2025 pending the hearing and determination of the Motion on Notice for interlocutory injunction,” part of the application reads.
In his ruling, the judge directed the defendants to show cause within 72 hours after being served with the order, explaining why an interlocutory injunction should not be granted against them.
Egwuatu also approved the request for substituted service on the defendants.
The case was adjourned to March 10 for the defendants to present their case on why the applicant’s reliefs should
not be granted.