The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice John Tsoho, has reassigned the suit filed by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan against Senate President Godswill Akpabio and others to Justice Binta Nyako.
The case, which was initially handled by Justice Obiora Egwuatu, will now be heard afresh by Justice Nyako following Egwuatu’s withdrawal from the matter. His decision came after allegations of bias were reportedly raised by Akpabio, the third defendant in the suit.
Justice Egwuatu withdrew from the case on March 25, citing concerns over judicial integrity.
“Justice is rooted in confidence in the court. Once a litigant expresses his belief that there is bias or likelihood of bias on the part of the judge, it will not be in the interest of justice for the judge to continue,” he stated.
He forwarded the case file to the Chief Judge for reassignment.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, who represents Kogi Central Senatorial District, had filed the lawsuit to halt an investigation into her alleged misconduct by the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions. She had sought an interim injunction to prevent the committee from proceeding with disciplinary actions against her.
Justice Egwuatu previously issued an order on March 4 declaring Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension by the Senate null and void. However, on March 19, he set aside a portion of his ruling after hearing arguments from both sides. The Senate had filed a motion urging the court to vacate the order, arguing that it interfered with its legislative duties and could lead to a constitutional crisis.
During legal proceedings, the Senate’s lawyer, Chikaosolu Ojukwu, argued that the court’s order restrained the Senate from fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities, while Akpoti-Uduaghan’s counsel, Michael Numa, opposed the motion, describing it as a disregard for the court’s authority. He urged the court to dismiss the Senate’s application and take disciplinary action against the defendants for contempt.
Akpoti-Uduaghan also filed a contempt charge, asserting that her suspension was a deliberate violation of the court’s interim injunction. She maintained that the court’s directive was duly served on the defendants, but they proceeded with actions in defiance of the ruling.
Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution (as amended) grants the National Assembly the authority to manage its internal affairs, including disciplining its members. However, this power is not unlimited. It must be exercised in accordance with constitutional provisions, due process, and the rule of law.
The principle of separation of powers, outlined in Section 4 for the legislature, Section 6 for the judiciary, and Section 5 for the executive, ensures that each arm of government functions independently without interference. However, courts have the authority to review legislative actions if they infringe on fundamental rights or violate existing laws.
Judicial rulings have established that while legislatures hold disciplinary authority, their actions must align with the principles of natural justice, particularly the right to a fair hearing, as outlined in Section 36 of the Constitution. The outcome of this case could clarify the extent of legislative immunity and determine whether courts can override Senate disciplinary actions when due process is at stake.
