The legal counsel to Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has issued a strong rebuttal to the National Assembly’s position on her suspension, warning that the Senate risks violating the Constitution if it fails to obey a clear Federal High Court judgment ordering her recall.
In a formal rejoinder dated July 14, 2025, addressed to the Senate’s Director of Litigation and Counselling, Charles Yoila, Esq., Senior Advocate of Nigeria Michael Jonathan Numa stated that the court’s ruling was not optional, and must be treated as binding and enforceable under the law.
“With the utmost respect, we disagree with your interpretation. The enrolled judgment begins with the phrase ‘IT IS HEREBY ORDERED’ and contains twelve binding orders—not suggestions,” the letter reads.
The crux of the Senate’s argument hinges on Order 12 of the court judgment, which states that “the Senate should recall the Plaintiff.” But Numa and his team argue that the totality of the judgment, the use of mandatory language in other orders, and established constitutional principles point to an obligation, not a mere recommendation.
Quoting Sections 287(3) and 1(3) of the Nigerian Constitution, the legal team insisted that no institution or individual is above the law, and that court judgments—whether framed as “orders” or “recommendations”—must be enforced when they arise from fully contested proceedings.
“The judgment qualifies as a binding decision under Section 318 of the Constitution. The Senate is under a legal duty to give it full effect,” Numa said, citing Ecobank v. Tempo Energy (2025) as precedent.
The rejoinder also noted that the court had explicitly declared Senator Akpoti’s suspension illegal, unconstitutional, and in violation of the Senate’s own Standing Orders. Her team emphasized that any attempt to treat the judgment as ambiguous or open to internal interpretation is both disingenuous and dangerous to democratic accountability.
“By refusing to comply, the Senate not only undermines the rule of law—it sets a dangerous precedent of institutional impunity,” the lawyers warned.
Significantly, the letter informed the National Assembly that Senator Akpoti intends to resume her legislative duties on July 22, 2025, and will not allow her mandate to be further suppressed.
This latest exchange deepens the standoff between the legislature and judiciary, with many legal analysts warning that the Senate’s position could amount to contempt of court if it continues to block her reinstatement.
The case has captured national attention, not only because of its legal implications, but also because Senator Akpoti is seen as a symbol of female political resilience in a male-dominated system. Her suspension, which came during ongoing court proceedings, was widely condemned by civil society groups as unconstitutional and punitive.
As the political and legal drama unfolds, the Senate now faces a critical choice: honour the court’s judgment or trigger a constitutional crisis.