The dispute between Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, representing Kogi Central, and Senate President Godswill Akpabio shows no signs of abating.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan has firmly refused to withdraw her sexual harassment accusation against Akpabio, despite calls from Olisa Agbakoba, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and counsel to the Senate President. The senator maintained her stance, asserting she had received “no letter, no retraction.”
In a formal response dated April 30, 2025, addressed to Agbakoba, Akpoti-Uduaghan clarified she had not been served with the two letters purportedly sent on April 14 and April 22, which demanded she retract her claims.
“I place it on formal record that no such letters have ever been served upon me by post, courier, or personal delivery. For the avoidance of doubt, I have received no correspondence dated 14th or 22nd April 2025. I stand by my complaint as lodged on 28 February 2025 and as pleaded in my Defence and Counter-Claim in CV/816/25,” she wrote.
Her statement followed Agbakoba’s public remarks accusing her of ignoring formal communications and continuing to spread what he called “false and unsubstantiated” allegations.
Agbakoba, speaking at a press briefing on Tuesday, referenced a December 9, 2023 Instagram post in which Akpoti-Uduaghan praised Akpabio, noting it was shared just a day after the alleged incident.
“You have failed to clarify your allegation of 8 December 2023 and your exaltation of Senator Akpabio on Instagram and X (formerly Twitter) on 9 December 2023 — the very next day,” Agbakoba said. “Rather than explain, you deleted the social media post, which to us is extremely concerning.”
He further questioned the timing of the accusation, pointing out the 14-month interval between the alleged harassment and her eventual public disclosure in February 2025.
“During this period, you were seen with Senator Akpabio at several events, including the Inter-Parliamentary Union session in Geneva on 24 and 25 March 2024, where you took selfies and group photos with him,” he added.
In her reply, Akpoti-Uduaghan dismissed the suggestion that cordial interactions at public events undermined her allegations.
“With respect, outward civility cannot be transposed into an admission that the misconduct never occurred. Legislative hierarchies, combined with acute gender asymmetries… place considerable coercive pressure on female legislators to maintain public decorum notwithstanding private discomfort,” she stated.
She explained that her limited public comments were due to the sub judice rule, as legal proceedings are ongoing in two separate suits: one filed by Akpabio’s wife (CV/816/25) and another by Akpoti-Uduaghan (FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025) challenging her suspension from the Senate.
“In fidelity to the doctrine of lis pendens and a court’s direction, my silence was occasioned. Given that both suits are currently before the courts, it is improper for any party to make extrajudicial comments,” she wrote.
Akpoti-Uduaghan further accused the Senate of denying her a fair hearing and undermining the representation of her constituency.
“The suspension deprived the electorate of Kogi Central representation… These events offend two core precepts of natural justice: nemo judex in causa sua (no one should be a judge in their own cause) and audi alteram partem (Let the other side be heard),” she added.
She also rejected Agbakoba’s call for her to prove her allegations outside the judicial process.
“A private legal practitioner, however distinguished, is not vested with adjudicatory authority… The assessment of evidence belongs to the courts alone,” she stated, cautioning against what she described as a coordinated media effort to pressure her into silence.
Akpoti-Uduaghan criticized what she viewed as selective legal advocacy by Agbakoba, accusing him of overlooking Akpabio’s involvement in her suspension.
“Your public interventions have thus far concentrated on alleged infirmities in my position, while eliding material improprieties perpetrated by your client. I respectfully invite you to provide your client with a comprehensive advisory… including the constitutional implications of occupying the dual roles of presiding officer and litigant,” she wrote.
She signaled readiness to seek international remedies if her constitutional rights continued to be violated.
“I reserve every right, municipal and international, to seek redress,” she affirmed.
Despite mounting pressure, the senator stood firm.
“I stand by the allegations in my petitions, which represent the truth of the events complained about. Further comments will be reserved for the Court, which alone has the exclusive preserve to exercise judgement,” she said.
