Inside a legal appeal that has become a test of power, procedure and political ego
When Senate President Godswill Akpabio decided to approach the Supreme Court over the suspension of Kogi Central senator, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, it was never just about legal technicalities. It was about control, precedent and a bruising power contest that has refused to fade quietly.
Court documents dated December 1, 2025, confirm that Akpabio has filed a Notice of Appeal at the apex court, challenging a decision of the Court of Appeal in Abuja which struck out the Federal Government’s brief in the case linked to Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension.
The appellate court had ruled that the brief was incompetent, citing multiple breaches of its rules. These included wrong font size and spacing, exceeding the mandatory 35 page limit, and failure to seek leave of court for the departures. More damagingly, the court also held that the Notice of Appeal itself was defective.
Supreme Court Affirms President’s Power to Declare State of Emergency, Suspends Govs, others
In law, the infractions were procedural. In politics, the implications were anything but.
A ruling grounded in rules, not sentiment
Despite Akpabio’s public assertion that the Court of Appeal struck out the brief “illegally,” certified records of proceedings show the decision was rooted squarely in established court rules.
The panel of justices ruled that the violations were substantive, not cosmetic, and directly affected the competence of the appeal. The brief was struck out in its entirety, effectively halting the Federal Government’s attempt to revive the case at that level.
For Akpabio, the ruling was a setback. For observers, his next move was unexpected.
Why the Senate President stepped in personally
Rather than allowing the matter to rest or be quietly recalibrated, Akpabio chose to personally escalate the case to the Supreme Court, a decision that has drawn scrutiny within legal and political circles.
Sources within the National Assembly say the Senate President has been closely tracking the case and remains deeply invested in its outcome.
“This has gone beyond legal housekeeping,” a source said. “It has become a political contest for relevance and dominance.”
The tension between Akpabio and Akpoti-Uduaghan is no secret. Since her first term began, the Kogi senator has emerged as one of the most outspoken critics of Senate leadership, a posture insiders say unsettled the Senate President.
A suspension that refused to end quietly
Akpoti-Uduaghan was suspended for six months in March 2025 after protesting the relocation of her seat during plenary. At the time, she accused Akpabio of victimisation and described his leadership style as dictatorial.
Although the suspension officially elapsed in September, her return was delayed by legal manoeuvres and resistance within the Senate. Her office was only reopened later by the Sergeant at Arms, after which she resumed duties, insisting she had “no apology to tender.”
The legal battle, however, never truly ended.
What Akpabio wants from the Supreme Court
In his appeal, Akpabio argues that the Court of Appeal violated his right to fair hearing by refusing to grant leave to regularise the defective brief or exceed the page limit.
He is asking the Supreme Court to nullify the proceedings of November 28, 2025, set aside the ruling, and allow him to refile his brief in compliance with court rules.
Akpoti-Uduaghan’s lawyers have confirmed being served and have dismissed the appeal as a desperate attempt to overturn a lawful decision.
“This is just another needless misadventure,” one of her lawyers said. “It will lead nowhere.”
More than law, a test of power
Within ruling party circles, there are whispers that powerful interests expect the Senate President to rein in Akpoti-Uduaghan’s growing profile. The Supreme Court appeal, to many, is now less about procedural justice and more about sending a signal.
As both sides head to the apex court, one question looms large: is this about defending Senate authority, or about silencing a defiant voice?
Either way, the Supreme Court is now set to arbitrate not just a legal dispute, but one of the most personal and politically charged confrontations of the 10th Senate.
