Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan (PDP, Kogi West) has strongly denied reports that she issued an apology to the Senate concerning her sexual harassment allegations against Senate President Godswill Akpabio, labeling such claims as a desperate attempt to silence her.
Meanwhile, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) received a petition yesterday calling for the recall of the Kogi West senator. This development came on the heels of a Federal High Court ruling in Lokoja, Kogi State, which on March 20 vacated the ex parte injunction previously granted to her.
In a statement issued yesterday, the senator denounced what she characterized as an orchestrated campaign aimed at discrediting her and vowed to persist in her quest for justice. She declared:
“I stand firm in my resolve to never apologise for speaking my truth.
“The desperation to silence me is palpable, but I will not be intimidated. The games being played in full view of Nigerians will be exposed, and those who have hijacked our institutions will be held accountable.”
Akpoti-Uduaghan argued that her suspension from the Senate is not merely a personal matter, but rather a clear instance of the powerful suppressing dissenting voices—particularly those of women who dare to challenge the status quo.
Despite the backlash, she insisted on continuing her fight for justice and for the rights of Nigerian women, urging the public to disregard the viral report of an apology, which she described as both false and manipulative.
Secretary to INEC, Rose Oriaran-Anthony, accepted the petition when a group of registered voters from Kogi Central stormed the INEC headquarters in Abuja yesterday.
Previously, a Federal High Court in Lokoja had, on Friday, set aside an earlier ruling that had prevented INEC from receiving the recall process initiated by Kogi Central constituents against their senator.
The court, in a judgment delivered in Lokoja, affirmed that the recall process is constitutionally valid and consistent with the civic rights of the constituents, urging them to continue exercising their rights in an orderly and peaceful manner.
Following this ruling, the constituents proceeded to the commission’s headquarters in Abuja to demand her immediate recall.
In a petition dated March 21, 2025, the constituents stated:
“We, the undersigned being duly registered voters of the Kogi Central Senatorial District, hereby invoke our rights under the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to formally demand the recall of Sen Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan from the Nigerian Senate.
“By this petition, which we have made sure is signed by more than half of the registered voters in Kogi Central, we hereby demand that INEC immediately commences the constitutional and procedural process of recall to remove Akpoti-Uduaghan from office and declare her seat vacant.”
Addressing reporters after submitting the petition, the group’s leader, Charity Omole, stated that those who had elected her now demand her recall.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Justice Isa Dashen of the Federal High Court, who issued the order setting aside the injunction, also called for an accelerated hearing of the case.
Earlier on Thursday, Dashen had granted an interim injunction restraining INEC from receiving, accepting, or acting on any petition bearing the signatures of members of Kogi Central.
The court also prohibited INEC from conducting any referendum based on such a petition to initiate a recall process for Akpoti-Uduaghan, pending the resolution of a motion on the matter.
However, INEC, represented by its counsel Abdullahi Aliyu (SAN), made an oral application to set aside the ex parte injunction granted to Akpoti-Uduaghan and requested an expedited hearing of the case.
Aliyu contended that, under the Constitution, the Federal High Court does not possess the jurisdiction to prevent a constitutional body like INEC from performing its statutory duties.
“I, hereby, make an oral application by virtue of the pronouncement made by the Court of Appeal in the case between EFCC v Bello for the interim injunction to be discharged,” he argued.
Counsel for the applicants, West Idahosa (SAN), objected to this application, asserting that when complainants raise an allegation of illegality, the court is duty-bound to restrain constitutional actions. He added,
“This is because every rule has an exception. More so the Supreme Court reaffirmed that when a case of illegality is brought before a court, the court would first look at it to be sure it is true. The plaintiffs in this matter said there’s an illegality of forgery backed with a valid affidavit before this honourable court.”
He further requested that the court not allow the application for vacation of the interim injunction.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Dashen granted the application, vacated the interim order, and ordered that the case be expedited.
The case is now adjourned until April 9, 2025, for further hearing.
