The Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) has pledged to investigate the complaint raised by Nigerian Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan regarding her six-month suspension and allegations of sexual harassment by the Nigerian senate.

Akpoti-Uduaghan took the matter to the IPU during the Women in Parliament session at the United Nations in New York, seeking justice for what she described as unlawful suspension and victimization by Nigeria’s Senate President, Godswill Akpabio.

In an emotional address, Akpoti-Uduaghan appealed to global democratic institutions for intervention, calling her suspension an unjust act.

In response, Tulia Ackson, the President of the IPU, acknowledged the senator’s concerns but emphasized that the IPU must also hear the other side of the story before taking any further action.

Ackson outlined that the IPU’s standard procedure is to listen to both parties involved in any complaint before proceeding.

Ackson said: “There was a matter that arose during the first session which we had this morning. The matter that was raised by our colleague from Nigeria, Senator Natasha, and because all of us heard what she said and it only serves us better if I put a word in what she has said.

“So I would like to say we have heard our her concerns, and having heard her, it would have been an opportunity for all of us to understand more about what she has said, but because we listened only on her side, as an institution as IPU, we will be taking the concerns that have been raised, not only taking her side, but also giving a chance to listen to the other side, as it is a custom for IPU. And after having listened to the other side, we will take steps as necessary.

“I thought it was necessary for us to say a word about it and then be able to take it further. So we have taken care, or we have taken the concerns that she raised, and we will be working on them, of course, having listened to the other side, and we will be able to take steps after that.

“I also recognize the fact that our Nigerian delegate, who is here had requested the floor honorable cavid, but because of time, she wasn’t given a chance to speak.

“But like I said, we have heard the concerns that have been raised by Senator Natasha, but at the same time, we have taken cognizance of the fact that you would have wished to address us, but time wasn’t enough to give us to give you a chance to do that.

“And that said, IPU will be taking this matter as we usually do when such such concerns are raised in meetings like this.”

Ackson also mentioned that time constraints prevented another Nigerian delegate from speaking at the session, but affirmed that the concerns raised by Akpoti-Uduaghan would still be thoroughly considered.

This development marks an ongoing process by the IPU to address the senator’s claims and uphold democratic processes.

Kelechukwu Mbagwu, the chief executive officer of CMB Building Maintenance & Investment Company Limited, is in fresh trouble over alleged N1 billion fraud.

Society Reporters reports that a Federal High Court in Lagos has set April 30 for the arraignment of the real estate tycoon on charges of conspiracy, obtaining by false pretence, and committing a N1,026,968,433 fraud.

Kelechukwu Mbagwu is facing these charges alongside his company, CMB Building Maintenance & Investment Company Limited Ltd., following an investigation by the Police Special Fraud Unit (PSFU) in Ikoyi, Lagos.

Both Mbagwu and his company were initially scheduled for arraignment on February 12, but the court postponed the proceedings to April due to the defendants’ absence.

The charges, which date back to 2019, accuse Mbagwu and his company of falsely presenting a sold property in Oniru, Victoria Island, Lagos, to Access Bank in order to secure a loan of over N1 billion.

Mbagwu and CMB Building are also alleged to have unlawfully converted the loan funds to his personal use.

The police’s charges are based on violations of Section 8(i)(a) and Section 1(i)(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, No. 14 of 2006, which are punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act. The charges also relate to Section 18(2)(b)(d) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022, punishable under Section 18(3) of the Act.

The charges against Mbagwu and his company read in part:

“That you Kelechukwu Mbagwu (Managing Director), CMB Building Maintenance & Investment Co. Ltd, and other directors (now at large), sometime in 2019, in Lagos, with intent to defraud, conspired to commit felony by obtaining money by false pretence, an offence contrary to Section 8(i)(a) and punishable under Section 1(3) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, No. 14 of 2006.

“That you, Kelechukwu Mbagwu, did falsely present to Access Bank, claiming that the property located in Oniru, Victoria Island, was owned by you and that you had title to it at the time of the transaction, while knowing that the property had already been sold to a third party without disclosing this to the bank. This misrepresentation is an offence under Section 1(i)(a) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act, No. 14 of 2006.

“That you, Kelechukwu Mbagwu, directly or indirectly converted, transferred, retained, or took possession of N1,026,968,433 belonging to Access Bank Plc, knowing that the funds were proceeds of an unlawful act, in violation of Section 18(2)(b)(d) and punishable under Section 18(3) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.”

The court will now proceed with the arraignment of Mbagwu and his company on April 30.

In a landmark ruling delivered on March 11, 2025, the court has declared that no marriage ever existed between Tunde Ayeni and Adaobi Alagwu, effectively dismissing all counterclaims made by Alagwu.

The case, which began on February 26, 2025, revolved around the legitimacy of a purported marriage that Ayeni contended did not exist due to the fact that the money paid was for the child, following intense pressure from Adaobi’s father.

Ayeni also argued that his prior marital commitment to his wife, Mrs. Abiola Ayeni, under the Marriage Act, further invalidated any claims of a marriage with Alagwu.

The court’s judgement was anchored on several critical points raised during the proceedings. As the petitioner, Ayeni presented evidence showing that he has been legally married to Mrs. Abiola Ayeni since 1994.

He emphasized that he did not marry Adaobi; rather, the money paid was meant for the child, whom he initially believed to be his.

He contended that this payment was made under pressure from Adaobi’s family, who insisted it be done to avert any customary consequences and to ensure that the child bore Ayeni’s name.

The court found that Alagwu’s claims lacked merit, citing clear statutory limitations defined by the Marriage Act. While Adaobi contended that the court lacked jurisdiction, the court ruled that the matter at hand was not between Ayeni and his wife but rather between Tunde Ayeni and Adaobi Alagwu. Also, since Adaobi admitted that the money had been returned according to the customary native law and customs, she could not now turn around to rely on jurisdiction.

During the hearings, Ayeni’s legal counsel, Joseph Silas, emphasized that Adaobi resorted to blackmail after Ayeni withdrew monthly allowances previously accorded to her and requested that she vacate the property he had entrusted to her.

In conclusion, the court affirmed that no marriage ever existed between Tunde Ayeni and Adaobi Alagwu, and all of Alagwu’s claims were rejected.