Premium News
Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, senator representing Kogi central, has asked the high court of the federal capital territory (FCT) to strike out the criminal defamation charge filed against her, describing it as unconstitutional, defective, and politically motivated.
BACKGROUND
On February 20, Akpoti-Uduaghan engaged the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, in a heated debate over seating arrangements in the upper legislative chamber.
The lawmaker later accused Akpabio of sexual harassment—a claim he has since denied.
Days later, the senate committee on ethics and privileges recommended Akpoti-Uduaghan for a six-month suspension on grounds of alleged breaches of parliamentary procedure.
On April 1, during a visit to her constituents in Kogi, the senator said any act of violence while the visit lasted should be blamed on Akpabio and Yahaya Bello, the former governor of the state.
On July 4, the federal high court in Abuja considered the suspension excessive and asked the senate to reinstate her.
On her return to the senate, Akpoti-Uduaghan accused Akpabio of treating her like his domestic staff.
‘CHARGE MEANT TO SERVE PERSONAL INTERESTS’
In a preliminary objection by her legal team led by Ehiogie West-Idahosa, senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Akpoti-Uduaghan said the three-count charge filed by the office of the attorney-general of the federation (OAGF) on May 16 was not in the public interest.
She alleged that the suit was meant to serve the private interests of the senate president and former governor of Kogi and one Sandra Duru.
The senator said the charge, numbered CR/297/25, was an attempt to use public funds to protect private reputations, stressing that her long-standing disputes with the trio were personal and political.
“The filing of the three-count charge was not done in the overriding interest of justice but in the interest of these private individuals,” she said.
Akpoti-Uduaghan further alleged that no investigation was conducted before the charges were filed, adding that several petitions she submitted against Akpabio and Bello over threats to her life were ignored.
“I verily believe that the facts forming the basis of the charge are interwoven with the subject matter of my petitions, which predate the alleged offence,” she said.
“The refusal of the authorities to act on my complaints, while hastily prosecuting the counterclaims by my political rivals, highlights a selective and unjust application of the criminal justice system.”
‘AGF ACTED BEYOND CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS’
Akpoti-Uduaghan argued that the attorney-general of the federation (AGF) acted beyond his constitutional powers under section 174(3) of the 1999 Constitution by filing criminal proceedings to defend the reputations of private individuals.
She said the alleged defamatory statements were political expressions protected by law, adding that the complainants had the option of seeking redress through civil litigation.
“The attorney-general of the federation lacks the locus standi to prosecute on behalf of private individuals,” she said.
“The law permits private persons to initiate and prosecute criminal complaints on their own, without recourse to public funds.”
The senator described the charges as discriminatory and malicious, insisting they were intended to silence and intimidate her as a legislator.
“The discriminatory manner in which I am being singled out for prosecution, while my serious allegations involving criminal violence are ignored, undermines the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and treatment before the law,” she added.
She urged the court to dismiss the charge for lack of merit, noting that it was an abuse of legal process aimed at persecuting her for political reasons.
