The Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) has strongly criticised the Senate’s decision to suspend Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months, calling it an unconstitutional move that undermines democracy and legislative independence.
Last Thursday, the Senate suspended Akpoti-Uduaghan, who represents Kogi Central district, for six months over violation of its rules.
Her suspension followed her dispute with Senate President Godswill Akpabio, who she accused of sexual harassment.
In a statement by its Executive Director, Comrade Auwal Ibrahim Musa (Rafsanjani), CISLAC condemned the action, stating that ‘it directly violates the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and sets a dangerous precedent for legislative governance’.
The Non-Governmental Organisation argued that the suspension of an elected senator contradicts Sections 68 and 69 of the 1999 Constitution, ‘which clearly outline the lawful processes for a legislator to lose their seat. Section 68(1) and (2) states that a legislator’s seat can only be declared vacant under specific circumstances such as resignation, defection, conviction, or recall by constituents through the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)’.
The statement reads: ‘Section 69 stipulates that the recall process is the only constitutional means for removing an elected legislator, making the Senate’s decision legally baseless. By suspending Senator Natasha, CISLAC noted that the Senate has effectively denied the people of Kogi Central Senatorial District their right to representation, an action that constitutes an abuse of power’.
The civil society group also highlighted past judicial rulings that have consistently declared legislative suspensions unlawful. It referenced to key cases such as Hon. Dino Melaye v House of Representatives (2009),where the Federal High Court ruled that legislative chambers lack the authority to suspend elected members.
‘In Ali Ndume v Senate President & Ors (2018), the Court of Appeal nullified the senator’s suspension, reinforcing the principle that lawmakers cannot be arbitrarily removed by their peers. Similarly, House of Assembly v Hon. Danna (2003) established that only the judiciary or the electorate have the power to remove an elected official. CISLAC accused the Senate of disregarding these precedents and eroding legislative independence by silencing dissenting voices’, Rafsanjani said.
The group also questioned Akpabio’s impartiality in handling the matter. It pointed out that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension stems from her raising sexual harassment allegations against Akpabio.
‘CISLAC argued that allowing the Senate’s Ethics Committee — seen as influenced by leadership—to dismiss the allegations without a fair and neutral review violates Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees every citizen the right to a fair hearing. The principle of Nemo Judex in Causa Sua (no one should be a judge in their own case) has been completely disregarded in this matter’, CISLAC stated, calling it a misuse of legislative power.
The organisation also warned that suspending lawmakers for expressing dissent weakens the oversight function of the National Assembly. It stressed that Section 39 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, including for lawmakers. Parliamentary immunity exists to protect legislators from persecution over statements made in the course of their duties.
‘A legislature where members fear retribution for questioning leadership cannot function as a true democracy. CISLAC warned that the move sets a dangerous precedent where Senate leadership can silence opposition through suspensions, effectively turning the National Assembly into a tool of intimidation’, it said.
CISLAC also expressed concern over the implications of the suspension on gender inclusion in politics, stating that the decision discourages women from participating in governance.
‘This move sends a message that female lawmakers can be silenced and intimidated at will, reversing decades of progress toward gender inclusion’, CISLAC noted. It further criticised the Ethics Committee for failing to uphold integrity by dismissing the sexual harassment claims instead of conducting a transparent investigation.
CISLAC expressed concern over the global reputational damage caused by the Senate’s decision, emphasising that ‘this action has legitimised attacks on freedom of expression, encouraged intimidation, and institutionalized sexual harassment in public spaces’.
The organisation warned that Nigeria risks being perceived as a country where democratic institutions are weaponized against dissenting voices, undermining its credibility in the international community.
It demanded the immediate reinstatement of Akpoti-Uduaghan and urged the Senate to retract its decision and uphold democratic principles and the peaceful resolution of the crisis.
