Akpabio Vs. Akpoti-Uduaghan: The High-Stakes Legal Showdown Unfolds

The Legal Battle Heats Up: Akpabio and Akpoti-Uduaghan Clash in Court

It’s drama time in the Nigerian legal arena as the ongoing legal feud between suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan and Senate President Godswill Akpabio reached a boiling point this past Wednesday. The two sides are now locked in a fierce disagreement over the Senate's effort to overturn a court order issued by the Federal High Court in Abuja on March 4, 2025. This order has become the focal point of their high-stakes battle, and both parties are pulling out all the stops to win.

Picture this: on March 17, 2025, the Senate, represented by its lawyer, the distinguished Chikaosolu Ojukwu, SAN, filed a motion with a bold request—to nullify Order Number Four from the ex-parte order granted by Justice Obiora Egwuatu. This order was a key victory for Akpoti-Uduaghan, part of the court’s relief package in her favor. But now, the Senate wants it gone, and the legal fireworks have begun.

What Sparked This Legal Battle?

This legal clash didn’t just happen overnight. It all started when Akpoti-Uduaghan took a stand against the Senate’s investigation into her conduct following an incident that unfolded at the Senate plenary on February 20, 2025. Feeling her rights were being trampled on, she turned to the courts for help. Her request? An interim injunction that would stop the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Code of Conduct, led by Senator Neda Imasuem, from continuing their probe into her actions.

Read also:

Level Up Your Streaming A Guide To Building A Thriving Gaming Channel

Naija News reported that the court listened and granted her request. Order Number Four was crystal clear: any action taken during the lawsuit would be null and void. It was a powerful win for Akpoti-Uduaghan, but the Senate wasn’t about to take it lying down.

The Senate Strikes Back

Through its legal team, the Senate argued that the court’s order was premature and shouldn’t have been issued without hearing from all parties involved. Ojukwu, the Senate’s lawyer, stressed that the court cannot issue an order that affects others before the case is fully resolved. He went further, claiming that the court was misled into granting the order, which he argued violated Section 36(1) of the Constitution—the right to a fair hearing.

In essence, the Senate is saying, “Hey, this order isn’t fair. It’s like deciding the game before the final whistle blows.” They believe the court overstepped its bounds and want the order vacated.

On the Other Side: Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Defense

Not one to back down, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s lawyer, the equally formidable Michael Numa, SAN, hit back hard. He dismissed the Senate’s arguments as part of a larger conspiracy to undermine her case. Numa pointed out that his client had filed a detailed affidavit of 12 paragraphs, backed by six exhibits, to counter the Senate’s motion. These documents laid out the timeline and events leading up to the court’s decision, strengthening her position.

Numa also raised an eyebrow at the Senate’s selective challenge. “Why are they only targeting Order Number Four?” he asked. “They haven’t disputed the other orders the court granted.” He accused the Senate of ignoring a crucial requirement—to show cause within 72 hours after receiving the order. “This is an invitation to anarchy,” he declared, suggesting the Senate’s actions bordered on disrespect for the court’s authority.

Numa urged the judge to not only dismiss the Senate’s application but also to wield the court’s disciplinary powers. He argued that the Senate’s behavior amounted to contempt of court, and the judge needed to send a strong message.

Read also:

Celebrity Homes And Cars Where The Rich And Famous Live And What They Drive

What Happens Next?

After both sides presented their arguments, Justice Egwuatu took a step back. The matter was adjourned, with the judge set to deliver a ruling at a later date. The courtroom was filled with anticipation as everyone waited to see how this legal saga would unfold. Would the court stand by its original order, or would the Senate’s appeal prevail? Only time will tell.

This case isn’t just about legal technicalities—it’s about principles, fairness, and the integrity of the judicial process. As the battle continues, all eyes are on the court to see who will emerge victorious in this high-stakes showdown.