Senate President Godswill Akpabio has challenged the judgment of the Federal High Court judgment in favour of suspended Senator Natasha Akpati Uduaghan
In an 11-ground appeal, the Senate president argued that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the matter
The Senate president also accused Justice Binta Nyako of erring, adding that she raised matters that were not presented by any of the parties in the ruling. …CONTINUE READING
Channels TV reported that the legal team of the Senate president is seeking to challenge the jurisdiction of the High Court, insisting that the matter remains the internal affairs of the National Assembly and that the court did not have the power to hear the matter, citing Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution.
Akpabio’s legal team presented 11 grounds of appeal and faulted the ruling of the Federal High Court that dismissed its preliminary objection. The team claimed that the court order affected the procedures of the parliament that were protected by the law.
The Senate president explained that the issues relating to suspension, comments uttered during plenary, and the resolution of the Chamber are protected under the Legislative Houses (Power and Privileges) Act, and thus cannot be a subject of judicial interference
Another argument Akpabio presented was that the suit was premature and Natasha failed to exhaust all the channels for internal dispute resolution within the Senate, particularly the Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, as stipulated in the Senate Standing Orders, 2023 (as amended).
He also faulted the court trial for breaching his right to a fair hearing by raising issues that were not presented by any of the parties in the suit. The example cited was the question of whether Natasha’s suspension was excessive.
The Senate president explained that Justice Nyako erred when he made recommendations for her to be recalled without giving the parties to address the core issue.
Justice Binta Nyako of the court, in a judgment on Friday, July 4, ordered the recall of Senator Natasha, adding that the six-month suspension that the Senate slammed on the Kogi lawmaker was “excessive”.
The court also faulted the Senate Standing Rules’ Chapter 8 and Section 14 of the Legislative Houses, Powers and Privileges Act, stating that the two provisions were overreaching. The two legislative guidelines did not specify the maximum period of time that a sitting lawmaker can be suspended from office.
