Appellate Court Upholds Senate’s Disciplinary Powers, Nullifies N5m Contempt Fine Against Akpoti-Uduaghan

• As Kogi senator, Senate celebrate victories

Alex Enumah  and Sunday Aborisade in Abuja

The Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, in a unanimous judgement on Monday, held the trial court was right in holding that the senate had powers to take actions against members in breach of its rules and regulations.

However, the panel, in their verdict, disagreed with Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s conviction on contempt of court, and subsequently nullified the N5 million fine imposed on her by the lower court.

The Kogi senator had last July approached the appellate court to challenge the July 4, 2025 judgement against her by Justice Binta Nyako of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

Among others, she alleged that the trial court erred in law when it affirmed her suspension from the floor of the senate.

Akpoti-Uduaghan also alleged breach of her rights to fair hearing in her suspension.

Delivering judgement in the appeal on Monday, the three-member panel held that Senate had powers to discipline any erring member and, in the instant case, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s fundamental right was never breached, as she alleged.

According to Justice Abba Mohammed, Senate, by the provisions of Section 66(4) of Senate’s Standing Rule, had the power to invoke disciplinary action to ensure orderliness in the conduct of Senate’s proceedings.

Mohammed added that the senate, by its rules, empowered the senate president to allocate seats to members. He said members could only speak when they were on the seats allocated to them; the senate president can order an unruly member out of the plenary; and even refer such a member to the senate ethics committee, among others.

The case stemmed from a February 20, 2025 incident, where the re-allocation of Akpoti-Uduaghan’s seat had resulted in an altercation between her and Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

The appellate court faulted the Kogi senator for refusing to move to her new seat and for speaking outside her allocated seat.

Mohammed further faulted Akpoti-Uduaghan’s claim that she ought to be notified in the event of a change of seat before plenary.

However, it was the position of the appellate court that the Federal High Court, in the first instance, ought to have declined jurisdiction in entertaining the suit, having discovered that the senate acted in line with the provisions that permit it to suspend any erring member.

The panel held that upon been told about the re-allocation of seat, Akpoti-Uduaghan ought to have moved to her new seat. It added that the senate was right to enforce order 6 Rule 2, following her persistent refusal to obey the senate order.

Similarly, the appellate court faulted the Kogi senator for refusing to appear before the Senate Committee on Ethics, Petition and Privileges.

The Court of Appeal dismissed Akpoti-Uduaghan’s claim that her suspension was carried out in violation of an order by Justice Obiora Egwuatu of the Federal High Court, Abuja, stating that since Egwuatu recused himself and the matter was started afresh by Justice Binta Nyako, the order of Egwuatu was no longer subsisting.

Akpoti-Uduaghan, the senator the Kogi Central, described Monday’s ruling of the Court of Appeal striking out the N5 million fine and apology order imposed on her, as a “clear vindication of the rule of law” and a decisive blow to what she called a flawed and unconstitutional process.

In a statement following the judgement delivered on February 9, the senator said the appellate court’s decision reaffirmed her long-held position that the contempt proceedings arising from her controversial six-month suspension from the senate were legally defective and could not stand the test of due process.

Akpoti-Uduaghan said the judgement underscored the supremacy of the constitution and the limits of authority, even within the legislature.

“This ruling confirms what we have consistently maintained, that due process is not optional and no institution or individual is above the law,” she said.

“Where procedures laid down by law are ignored, justice cannot be achieved, and the courts will not hesitate to intervene,” She added.

She described the striking out of the N5 million fine and the apology order as a complete closure of the contempt matter in her favour, stating that the appellate court’s decision is not merely personal but of national importance.

The senator said, “This judgement goes beyond me as an individual. It speaks to the protection of democratic principles, the rights of constituents to representation, and the need for all arms of government to act within constitutional boundaries.”

Akpoti-Uduaghan’s appeal was part of the wider legal battle trailing her six-month suspension from the senate, a sanction that had continued to generate intense public debate, legal scrutiny, and criticism from constitutional lawyers and civil society organisations.

An elated Senate also welcomed what it saw as a landmark judgement by the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, which upheld its constitutional authority to discipline members, while setting aside a N5 million contempt fine against Akpoti-Uduaghan.

The judgement affirmed Senate’s powers to manage its proceedings, including seat allocation, control of debates, referral to the Ethics Committee, and imposition of disciplinary measures.

Akpabio’s cross-appeal was also fully upheld, with the court stating that the trial court’s remarks on Akpoti-Uduaghan’s six-month suspension were merely obiter.

The suspension itself, the court ruled, was lawful, neither excessive nor unjust.

However, the court set aside the N5 million contempt fine, holding that the alleged contempt was criminal in nature and had not followed due process, including compliance with Forms 48 and 49.

Senate spokesman, Senator Yemi Adaramodu, described the judgement as a “resounding affirmation of parliamentary autonomy and the separation of powers”.

Adaramodu said, “The ruling confirms that the Senate’s disciplinary powers are constitutionally protected and that lawful internal proceedings do not violate the fundamental rights of members.

“Courts will only intervene in cases of clear constitutional breaches.”

Legal observers said the decision reinforced the principle that the senate had exclusive authority to manage its internal affairs, ensuring that members are held accountable without external interference.

“The senate views this judgement as a boost to institutional integrity, confirming that internal discipline is both necessary and constitutionally sound,” Adaramodu added.