The president of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, has presented an appeal notice that defies the judgment of Judge Binta Nyako of the Federal Superior Court in Abuja, which ordered the withdrawal of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan to the Senate after his controversial suspension.
The appeal notice, dated July 14, 2025 and presented at the Court of Appeals, Abuja Division, is based on 11 motifs. Akpabio is asking the Court of Appeals to annul the judgment of July 4, 2025 of the Court of First Instance.
The appeal, marked ca/a // 2025, arises from the demand number FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025, presented by Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan to challenge his suspension of the Senate after a dispute on the seat agreements.
The Court of First Instance had ruled in its favor, ordering the Senate to remember it, describing the six -month suspension as excessive and without legal justification.
Through his legal team, AKPabio argued that the Federal Superior Court made an error in the law by assuming the jurisdiction on an issue that refers to the internal functioning of the National Assembly and, therefore, is outside the jurisdiction of the Court as described in section 251 of the 1999 Constitution.
He maintains that the Court has no authority to judge issues related to the legal rights and privileges of the members of the National Assembly.
In the appeal notice, Akpabio described several aspects of the ruling that found objectable, particularly the dismissal of the Court to its preliminary objection, its decision on the validity and duration of the suspension of Akpoti-Uduaghan and its recommendation that it is remembered.
Among the reasons for appeal, Akpabio argued that the judge of first instance caused a spontaneous abortion of justice by assuming jurisdiction on an issue that, according to him, he presented himself prematurely and violated the procedures for resolving internal disputes of the Senate, as specified in the permanent orders of Senate 2023 (as modified).
In addition, he argued that the issue should have been resolved internally by the Senate Ethics Committee, privileges and public requests before being presented before the Court.
Akpabio also criticized the Court of First Instance for not applying the provisions of the Law of Legislative Houses (powers and privileges), which protects the legislative procedures of the judicial interference. He affirmed that Akpoti-Uduaghan complaints arose from the words spoken during plenary and Senate resolutions, which are protected by law.
Also read: Ekiti Govt issues a warning about diphtheria prevention
He accused the Federal Superior Court of violating his right to a fair hearing by raising Suo Motu problems, for his own initiative, which were not declared or discussed by the parties. Specifically, he argues that the judge incorrectly introduced the question of whether the six -month suspension was excessive and issued an order for his retirement without a hearing of presentations from any of the parties.
In addition, AKPabio's legal team argued that the court made an error when failing to the interlocutory application of Akpoti-Uduaghan and fuse their reliefs with which they become its summons of substantive origin, despite the duplication of reliefs.
He also said that the court acted incorrectly proceeding to listen to the substantive lawsuit despite the fact that Akpoti-Uduaghan allegedly violated an earlier order that restricts the public comment on the matter.
In addition, Akpabio argued that the Federal Superior Court lacked jurisdiction to listen to the case because Akpoti-Uduaghan did not comply with section 21 of the Law of Legislative Houses (powers and privileges), which requires a three-month written notice in the Secretary of the National Assembly before instituting any legal action against a legislative chamber.
In his relief before the Court of Appeals, Akpabio is looking for an order that allows the appeal and leaving aside the parts of the sentence that dismissed his preliminary objection, said excessive suspension and ordered the withdrawal of Akpoti-Uduaghan.
He is also asking the Court of Appeals to hit what he described as duplicate reliefs in his requests for interlocutory court order, mandatory court order and citation of origin. In addition, he is urging the court to invoke his powers under section 15 of the Law of the Court of Appeals to dismiss the claim of Akpoti-Uduaghan completely for lack of jurisdiction.
Akpabio's legal team also argued that the Court of First Instance exceeded its constitutional authority by offering what they called “advisory opinions” about how the Senate should handle the withdrawal of a suspended member. They argue that the court lacks jurisdiction to interfere with the internal affairs of the Senate or to recommend changes in their permanent orders.
Nigerian tribe