Charles Nwokedi
Last Thursday, March 6, 2025, will go down in history as one 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.
Fourteen days before the suspension, the elegant female lawmaker had an altercation with the President of the Senate, Sen Godswill Akpabio over a new sitting arrangement that did not go down well with her.
On getting into 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 the change but her attempt to raise a point of order to seek explanations met a stiff resistance.
Akpabio, the presiding officer ruled her out of order in a manner that suggested that 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 furry like a woman scorned. She stated her case so strongly and angrily that sone of her colleague legislators moved towards 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 an unruly behaviour.
There were suggestions that Natasha must be suspended there and then but a higher reasoning prevailed and her case was referred to the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions. But everyone knew that giving the committee the task of investigating Natasha”s alleged unruly behaviour was a mere formality.
Hence when the Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions Committee rushed through the assignment and submitted its report even without 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 surprises.
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 all alone, except for family, friends, well wishers and constituents.
This is not only cruel but 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 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 took a decision to suspend Natasha without looking at the circumstances leading to her open protest during plrmenary on February 20, 2025.
While it is true that the Senate Standing. Rules give the Presiding Officer (Akpabio) the prerogative to allocate seats to lawnakers, the sane Standing Rules prescribed that the Clerk of the Senate should notify the 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 annd Public Petitions Committee, claimed that the formal petition Natasha submitted on the sexual harrasment 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 but a male presiding officer could sit in judgement over his own case?
After all 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 may have also been one of the factors at play. 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.
Obviuisoy, the Senate went on an over- drive when it slammed a sux- month suoension on Natasha. Is Akpabio and his other colleagues not aware of court judgements that said the Senate or House of Representatives does not have the powers to suspend a member of either of the chambers 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 unfair, undemocratic and a miscarriage of justice which must not be allowed to stand in a civilised country.
END
*Charles Nwokedi, a public affairs analyst, wrote from Abuja.
