Following a Federal High Court judgment calling for the reinstatement of suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the Nigerian Senate has given conditions for the return of the Senator.
The Senate Spokesperson, Yemi Adaramodu, said the Red Chamber would only reinstate the Senator after certain conditions have been met by her, noting that the court judgment did not override the Senate’s constitutional powers to discipline its members.
“Which judgment are we appealing when they (the court) said the Senate has the right to discipline its erring members? The court has not ousted the Senate’s statutory right to punish any erring senator.
“It was established that the senator in question erred. The court has already told her to go and do some things, like restitution, so after the restitution, the Senate will now sit again and consider the content of that restitution, and that will inform our next line of action,” Adaramodu said.
The Senate, he explained, would only reconvene to deliberate on the matter after Akpoti-Uduaghan had complied with the court’s directives.
“The onus is no more on us now; it is already on her doorstep to go and apologise. Once she does that, then the Senate will sit and determine how to deal with her matter.
“The first reaction now will not be from us, the court has ruled, so once she takes the step to redress and does what the court has directed her to do, then the Senate will sit and look at the content of her reaction as prescribed by the court,” Adaramodu added.
Addressing journalists after the judgment, the Senate counsel, Paul Daudu, SAN, described the ruling as a partial victory for the Senate, particularly on the issue of civil contempt arising from social media posts made during the case.
Daudu said, “The first application filed by the Senate, that no social media posts should have been made, was decided in our favour. The court directed that the satirical apology be taken down and that a proper apology be published in two national dailies. Additionally, damages of five million naira were awarded to be paid to the court.”
On the substantive ruling regarding the suspension, Daudu noted that the Senate’s authority to discipline its members was not in dispute.
“It appears the court affirmed that the Senate, as an institution, has the right to discipline its members. While members are elected to represent constituencies, they are expected to conduct themselves in accordance with the Senate’s standing rules,” he said.
He explained that the court did not order Akpoti-Uduaghan’s reinstatement but merely suggested that the Senate could consider recalling her.
“There was no relief asking for the suspension to be lifted. The judge only made what we call an obiter dictum, a non-binding remark, that the suspension may have been excessive. We will consult with our colleagues, read the full judgment, and respond accordingly,” he added.
