Details: Why Judge Withdrew from Natasha’s Suit Against Akpabio and Others
Justice Obiora Egwuatu of the Federal High Court in Abuja has recused himself from a suit filed by suspended Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan against Senate President Godswill Akpabio and others. The suit seeks to halt her investigation by the Senate over alleged misconduct.
During Tuesday’s proceedings, Justice Egwuatu announced his withdrawal, citing allegations of bias made against his court by one of the defendants. After allowing the lawyers to introduce themselves, the judge stated that he would not continue hearing the case due to the claims of bias.
In a brief ruling, the judge remarked, “Justice is rooted in confidence in the court. Once a litigant expresses a belief that there is bias or a likelihood of bias on the part of the judge, it is not in the interest of justice for the judge to continue. One of the defendants has communicated such a belief in writing. In that circumstance, the honorable action for the court is to refrain from proceeding with the matter. Therefore, I recuse myself from this case. The case file will be forwarded to my Lord, the Chief Judge, for further direction.”
The defendants listed in the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025, include the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Senate, the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Code of Conduct, Senator Neda Imasuem.
On March 19, Justice Egwuatu vacated an earlier order he had made on March 4, which stated that any action taken by the Senate and others during the pendency of the suit would be “null, void, and of no effect whatsoever.” The judge agreed with the defendants’ lawyers that this order should be vacated.
Chikaosolu Ojukwu (SAN), the Senate’s lawyer, argued that the order was vague, ambiguous, and lacked specificity, failing to clearly specify which parties it targeted or which actions it related to. He contended that the order referred to all actions without limitation, affecting both the plaintiff/respondent and the defendants. Ojukwu stated that the law prohibits courts from issuing vague orders and pointed out that this order, made ex parte, was intended to remain in effect until the suit was resolved.
He further argued that, according to Section 4 of the 1999 Constitution, the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is established to make laws for the peace, order, and good governance of the nation. The order, as granted, effectively restrained the Senate from conducting its legislative duties, which could lead to a constitutional crisis and anarchy, halting all of the Senate’s legislative functions.
Ojukwu emphasized that the order violated the doctrine of separation of powers as enshrined in the Constitution. He claimed that the court had been misled into granting this order and requested that the court recognize that the proceedings of March 4, which resulted in this breach, were null and void.
Other defendants’ lawyers—Charles Yoila (for the Clerk), Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN) (for the Senate President), and Umeh Kalu (SAN) (for Imasuem)—supported Ojukwu’s submissions.
