Last Thursday, March 6, 2025, will go down in history as a dark day in Nigeria, Africa’s most populous country. Indeed, it was a dark day for Nigeria’s democracy as the Nigerian Senate suspended one of its own, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, for violating the Standing Rules of the Red Chamber of the National Assembly. Â
Fourteen days before the suspension, the elegant female lawmaker had an altercation with the President of the Senate, Senator Godswill Akpabio, over a new sitting arrangement that did not go down well with her.
On entering the hallowed chamber of the parliament that fateful day, Natasha found that she had been relocated from the seat allocated to her when she was elected to represent the Central Senatorial District of Kogi State. Since she had no prior knowledge of the change in the sitting arrangement, she could not understand the reason for it, but her attempt to raise a point of order to seek an explanation met stiff resistance.
Akpabio, the presiding officer, ruled her out of order in a manner that suggested there was more to the change of seat than the authorities were ready to divulge.
Enraged by this attitude, Natasha rose to her feet, took hold of the microphone, and protested openly, alleging that her relocation to another seat was in bad faith.
As they say, hell knows no fury like a woman scorned. She stated her case so strongly and angrily that some of her colleague legislators moved toward her to calm her frayed nerves.
But, unknown to her, the audacity with which she made that open protest had angered the authorities, who saw it as unruly behavior.
There were suggestions that Natasha should be suspended immediately, but a more rational perspective prevailed, and her case was referred to the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions. However, everyone knew that giving the committee the task of investigating Natasha’s alleged unruly behavior was merely a formality.
Thus, when the Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions Committee rushed through the assignment and submitted its report without even hearing from Natasha, it was clear that it had done a hatchet job.
The speedy consideration of the report and the unanimous endorsement of its recommendations were, therefore, no surprise.
It is no longer news that Natasha has been suspended for six months without pay.
In addition, her office has been sealed, and she must not be found anywhere near the National Assembly or participate in any legislative activity of the Senate. Like an outcast, she is going to live the next six months alone, except for family, friends, well-wishers, and constituents.
This is not only cruel but also a miscarriage of justice and an abuse of power. It is simply a way of saying to every lawmaker: “Don’t dare the Senate, or else we will give you the Natasha treatment.”
It is a pity that this is happening in Africa’s largest democracy and inside the National Assembly, the supposed bastion of that democracy. It is unfortunate that the Red Chamber decided to suspend Natasha without considering the circumstances that led to her open protest during plenary on February 20, 2025.
While it is true that the Senate Standing Rules give the Presiding Officer (Akpabio) the prerogative to allocate seats to lawmakers, the same Standing Rules prescribe that the Clerk of the Senate should notify affected lawmakers that their seats would be (or have been) changed to avoid confusion.
Where exactly did Natasha go wrong? Is it because she took the bull by the horns when she found herself in a tight corner, or is it the sexual harassment allegation she made against Akpabio that turned the tide against her?
The puppets in the Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions Committee claimed that the formal petition Natasha submitted regarding the sexual harassment scandal was dead on arrival, but that is against the rule of natural justice.
At least she submitted it a record two times, and it was twice rejected by the chamber. How could the Standing Rules of the Senate be so stringent that a female lawmaker cannot ventilate her grievances, while a male presiding officer can sit in judgment over his own case?
After all is said and done, one is tempted to believe that patriarchy, male hegemony, and male chauvinism may have worked against Natasha in this melodrama.
It is also possible that party affiliation and the rivalry that goes with it played a role. Akpabio, the man with the gavel, belongs to the All Progressives Congress (APC), while Natasha belongs to the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), the main opposition party in the country.
Obviously, the Senate went overboard when it slammed a six-month suspension on Natasha. Are Akpabio and his colleagues not aware of court judgments stating that the Senate or House of Representatives does not have the power to suspend a member of either chamber for more than two weeks?
The leadership of the Senate should know that by suspending Natasha for six months, it has automatically shut out the people of Kogi Central Senatorial District from the National Assembly for that period. It is unfair, undemocratic, and a miscarriage of justice, which must not be allowed to stand in a civilized country.
Charles Nwokedi, a public affairs analyst, writes from Abuja.
