Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, senator representing Kogi central,has asked the high court of the federal capital territory (FCT) to strike outthe criminal defamation charge filed against her, describing it asunconstitutional, defective, and politically motivated. BACKGROUND On February 20, Akpoti-Uduaghan engaged the SenatePresident, Godswill Akpabio, in a heated debate over seating arrangements inthe upper legislative chamber. The lawmaker later accused Akpabio of sexual harassment—aclaim he has since denied. Days later, the senate committee on ethics and privilegesrecommended Akpoti-Uduaghan for a six-month suspension on grounds of allegedbreaches of parliamentary procedure. On April 1, during a visit to her constituents in Kogi, thesenator said any act of violence while the visit lasted should be blamed onAkpabio and Yahaya Bello, the former governor of the state. On July 4, the federal high court in Abuja considered thesuspension excessive and asked the senate to reinstate her. On her return to the senate, Akpoti-Uduaghan accused Akpabioof treating her like his domestic staff. ‘CHARGE MEANT TO SERVE PERSONAL INTERESTS’ In a preliminary objection by her legal team led by EhiogieWest-Idahosa, senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Akpoti-Uduaghan said thethree-count charge filed by the office of the attorney-general of thefederation (OAGF) on May 16 was not in the public interest. She alleged that the suit was meant to serve the privateinterests of the senate president and former governor of Kogi and one SandraDuru. The senator said the charge, numbered CR/297/25, was anattempt to use public funds to protect private reputations, stressing that herlong-standing disputes with the trio were personal and political. “The filing of the three-count charge was not done in theoverriding interest of justice but in the interest of these privateindividuals,” she said. Akpoti-Uduaghan further alleged that no investigation wasconducted before the charges were filed, adding that several petitions shesubmitted against Akpabio and Bello over threats to her life were ignored. “I verily believe that the facts forming the basis of thecharge are interwoven with the subject matter of my petitions, which predatethe alleged offence,” she said. “The refusal of the authorities to act on my complaints,while hastily prosecuting the counterclaims by my political rivals, highlightsa selective and unjust application of the criminal justice system.” ‘AGF ACTED BEYOND CONSTITUTIONAL POWERS’ Akpoti-Uduaghan argued that the attorney-general of thefederation (AGF) acted beyond his constitutional powers under section 174(3) ofthe 1999 Constitution by filing criminal proceedings to defend the reputationsof private individuals. She said the alleged defamatory statements were politicalexpressions protected by law, adding that the complainants had the option ofseeking redress through civil litigation. “The attorney-general of the federation lacks the locusstandi to prosecute on behalf of private individuals,” she said. “The law permits private persons to initiate and prosecutecriminal complaints on their own, without recourse to public funds.” The senator described the charges as discriminatory andmalicious, insisting they were intended to silence and intimidate her as alegislator. “The discriminatory manner in which I am being singled outfor prosecution, while my serious allegations involving criminal violence areignored, undermines the constitutional guarantees of equal protection andtreatment 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 forpolitical reasons.
Related Articles
Don't miss out on breaking stories and in-depth articles.