Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has formally challenged a Federal High Court ruling that found her guilty of contempt, filing a Notice of Appeal and a motion for a stay of execution at the Court of Appeal in Abuja.
The ruling, delivered on July 4, 2025, by Justice Binta Nyako in Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025, imposed a ₦5 million fine on the senator and directed her to issue a public apology in two national newspapers and across her social media platforms.
The court found that a satirical Facebook post made by the senator on April 27, 2025, breached an earlier injunction prohibiting media commentary on the ongoing case.
In legal filings dated July 9 and 10, 2025, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan is seeking to halt the execution of the court’s orders pending the outcome of her appeal. The motion argues that enforcing the penalty at this stage would cause irreparable damage to her legislative functions, political standing, and public reputation.
The appeal lists the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Nigerian Senate, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, and Senator Neda Imasuen, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, as respondents.
READ ALSO: Coalition good for Nigeria s democracy, Tinubu’s CoS Gbajabiamila declares
Represented by a senior legal team including Prof. Roland Otaru (SAN), Michael Jonathan Numa (SAN), Chief J.S. Okutepa (SAN), Dr. E. West Idahosa (SAN), and J.I. Usman (SAN), the senator contends that the trial court lacked jurisdiction and failed to comply with essential legal procedures outlined in the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act.
The legal team specifically pointed to non-compliance with Forms 48 and 49, which are procedural prerequisites for contempt proceedings outside the courtroom (contempt ex facie curiae). They argue that the alleged contempt, centering on a post related to sexual harassment claims, was unrelated to the original subject of her referral to the Senate Committee and subsequent suspension.
Moreover, the appeal asserts that the ₦5 million fine represents a criminal sanction imposed without the observance of due process, thereby violating Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s right to a fair hearing. Her counsel further described the fine as excessive and punitive.
The motion emphasizes the principle of judicial restraint, asserting that granting a stay of execution would preserve the status quo without prejudicing the respondents, while refusing it could render the appeal nugatory. Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan has also indicated willingness to pay damages should the motion be found frivolous.
“This appeal is a critical step to uphold Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s constitutional rights and ensure judicial fairness,” said Michael Jonathan Numa, SAN. “The trial court’s ruling oversteps its authority and misapplies the law, necessitating a thorough review by the Court of Appeal.”
