By Prosper Ishaya
On February 20, 2025, during a plenary session, tensions arose when Senate President Godswill Akpabio directed Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan to vacate her seat, which had been reassigned to accommodate recent changes in the chamber’s composition. The reassignment followed the defection of two opposition senators to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). Senate Chief Whip Mohammed Monguno cited Orders 24 and 6 of the Senate Standing Rules, emphasising the Senate President’s authority to reassign seats as necessary. However, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan resisted the directive, leading to a standoff that resulted in the Senate President ordering the sergeants-at-arms to remove her from the chamber.
During a live interview on Arise TV the following week, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan accused the Senate President of making inappropriate advances toward her in December 2024. She claimed that the Senate President had delayed her motion to investigate corruption at the Ajaokuta Steel Company and implied that her compliance with his requests would facilitate legislative processes. Akpabio has since denied these allegations, labeling it as “traumatizing”.
In the days following her allegations, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan continued to express her grievances. On March 5, 2025, she formally submitted a sexual harassment petition against Senate President Godswill Akpabio during the Senate’s plenary session, citing Senate Rule 40.
The next day, March 6, 2025, the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions recommended her suspension, citing her refusal to sit in her assigned seat, speaking without recognition, and making abusive remarks against the Senate leadership. The Senate adopted the committee’s recommendation, resulting in an immediate six-month suspension during which Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan will be barred from her office, and her allowances and security will be withdrawn.
In response to her suspension, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan filed a lawsuit against the Senate President, seeking 100 billion naira in damages.
But experts in the legal profession like Dr Abdul Mahmud, Managing Partner at Liberty Semper Fidelis LP, say that the suspension lacks constitutional backing. “The Senate has no powers to suspend a member,” said Dr Mahmud to Social Voices. “Suspension is not one of the constitutional disciplinary conditions set out in Section 68 of the 1999 Constitution. The Court of Appeal has already ruled in Speaker, Bauchi State House of Assembly v. Danna that no legislative house possesses the power to suspend an elected member.”
Dr Mahmud further noted that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension disregarded an ex parte order from the Federal High Court barring the Senate Ethics Committee from proceeding with her case.
Beyond the legal concerns, women’s rights advocates warn that the case reflects entrenched gender disparities in Nigeria’s political system.
“It sends a message to us that we already know—that politics in Nigeria is male-driven and male-centered. It is a boys’ club, a wealthy and powerful boys’ club,” said African feminist scholar Ololade Faniyi. “Even if it tries to pull a few women into itself, it is always an unresolved and unsuccessful pulling in.”
She argues that the handling of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s sexual harassment allegations against the Senate President follows a familiar pattern of victim-blaming and institutional retaliation against women who speak out.
“It is the same playbook of victim blaming, shaming, and silencing that all women in Nigeria have experienced when it comes to sexual, physical, and other forms of violence,” Faniyi added. She likened the case to the punishment of female students at the College of Medicine, University of Lagos, who faced institutional backlash after calling out male peers for sexual harassment.
The case has also raised concerns about the chilling effect it could have on future allegations of misconduct. “The suspension is a dangerous weapon deployed by the Senate to silence critics,” Dr Mahmud also said. “The effect of this is that it will compel victims of sexual harassment not to come forward in future.”
Despite the backlash, legal and gender rights experts say there are pathways for redress. Dr Mahmud noted that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan already has a lawsuit challenging her suspension. He expressed confidence that the courts would overturn the decision, citing that she stood on strong legal ground when she invoked Order 10 of the Rules to challenge the reassignment of her seat.
Reactions
The Federal Government has acknowledged the controversy and signaled efforts to mediate. Minister of Women Affairs, Iman Suleiman-Ibrahim, confirmed that discussions were underway with the National Assembly leadership to resolve the matter. “We are engaging with the Senate to ensure a fair outcome,” she stated, emphasising the need for due process and accountability.
The opposition party, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has condemned Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension, stating that it undermines democratic principles and sets a dangerous precedent for dissent in the legislature. The party called for a reversal of the decision, emphasising that no lawmaker should be sanctioned for raising misconduct allegations.
Also, women’s rights groups, political analysts and many Nigerians have criticised the suspension as a punitive measure against the lawmaker and are now demanding a fair hearing of the petition. They argue that it as a direct retaliation against a woman speaking out on sexual harassment and the Senate’s actions may deter other women from coming forward with similar allegations.
Mabel Adinya Ade, Executive Director of Adinya Arise Foundation described the suspension as a “travesty of justice” and an “assault on democracy” emphasising that it threatens the foundation of gender equality and freedom in Nigeria. Similarly, Hajia Nike AbdulRahman, National Convener of Women Advocacy for Good Governance, condemned the Senate’s action, stating that it undermines the principle of justice and fair hearing, and sets a dangerous precedent for women who come forward to report abuse or misconduct.
Likewise, social media has been flooded with calls for justice, with hashtags like #JusticeForNatasha and #IStandWithSenatorNatasha trending prominently in Nigeria. The hashtag #IStandWithSenatorNatasha, for instance, reached the 1st position nationally on X (formerly Twitter), amassing over 20,000 tweets in less than 48 hours.
One Twitter (X) user, Fareedah (@mixandrix102), in a tweet shared on March 6 at 8:28 p.m., condemned the handling of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s case, pointing out the injustice of punishing the victim instead of the alleged abuser.
“A woman was assaulted. She spoke up. Her abuser presided over her case. She was punished instead. If this does not make you sick, then you are part of the problem,” she tweeted, using the hashtags #JusticeForNatasha and #IStandWithSenatorNatasha.
Another Twitter (X) user, Dr. Chioma Nwakama-Akanno (@DrZobo), posted on March 6 at 1:46 p.m., highlighting the cycle of blame women face whether they speak up or remain silent.
“She’s abused… she gets blamed. She keeps quiet about it, she gets blamed. She speaks up, she gets blamed, shamed, framed. If she gives up… they still won’t shut up. She is all of us, past, present, and future, if we don’t unite against injustice!” The tweet was tagged with #IStandWithSenatorNatasha.
Similarly, Ridwan Oke (@Ridwanullahii), in a tweet shared on March 7 at 6:09 a.m., criticised the suspension of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan without giving her a fair hearing.
“No one has said they believed Sen. Natasha. What every reasonable person on my timeline has been saying is that she must be heard and not just that, she must be seen to be heard. If she has breached Senate rules, you can punish her for it after hearing her out BUT not before. Suspending her before she’s heard is a clear communication that her complaints don’t matter.”
Beyond this case, the controversy underscores persistent gender disparities in Nigerian politics. With women holding just 3.5% —4 female senators and 14 female members in the House of Representatives— of National Assembly seats, the suspension of one of the few female senators raises concerns about the inclusivity of Nigeria’s legislative system.
As the legal challenge to her suspension advances, the outcome could have significant implications for future legislative norms and the inclusivity of gender representation in Nigerian politics. According to Faniyi, systemic change is needed to ensure women in politics are better protected. “We need independent investigation channels outside the direct control of the accused’s institution,” she said. “We need to strengthen protections against retaliation and establish enforceable penalties.”
Faniyi recommends a multi-pronged approach to dismantling the systemic barriers that have long kept women on the fringes of political power in Nigeria. She argues that increasing women’s representation in politics, particularly feminist women committed to gender equity, is essential to challenging the deeply ingrained patriarchal structures that shape governance. “Liberation lies in our collective power,” she asserted.
But beyond individual representation, she stresses the need for stronger civil societies that can act as watchdogs, holding politicians accountable when official channels fail to protect women’s rights.
For real change to occur, Faniyi highlights the importance of political education at the community level. Many voters, she explains, prioritise short-term material benefits—what is often called “stomach infrastructure”—over policies that could drive long-term gender equity and social justice. This, she argues, must change. Communities need to be informed about the systemic discrimination women face in politics and governance, and they must be empowered to demand more from candidates beyond personal handouts.
Beyond education, she also calls for transparency in assessing political candidates’ positions on gender justice. Voters, activists, and journalists must scrutinise politicians’ track records on women’s rights, ensuring that those who seek public office are challenged on their stance toward gender equity. Where politicians fail to uphold these principles, she says, shame should be wielded as a political tool—calling out misogynist figures and exposing complicit women who enable harmful systems.
Finally, Faniyi insists that sustained coalition-building is crucial. Women’s rights organisations, human rights advocates, and political reform activists must work together, forming alliances to challenge oppressive structures. These coalitions, she says, should not only provide immediate support for women in politics but should also push for systemic reforms—rewriting laws, reshaping norms, and ensuring that political institutions become spaces where women are not only present but empowered.
For gender rights advocates, the path forward requires both immediate legal action and long-term structural change. The courts may provide an avenue to challenge Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension, but true progress demands deeper reforms: “independent investigative bodies for misconduct cases, enforceable protections against retaliation, and systemic efforts to dismantle political misogyny,” Faniyi said.
As Nigerians watch this case unfold, it is not just about the fate of one Senator, says Faniyi, it is about whether the country is willing to confront and dismantle the barriers that have long kept women on the margins of power.
