Headlines
FG Drags Natasha to Court for Defamation, Lists Akpabio, Yahaya Bello As Witnesses
The Federal Government has filed a criminal suit against the senator representing Kogi Central, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, over comments she made on national television that were allegedly deemed defamatory.
The case, marked CR/297/25, was filed on May 16, 2025, before the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, with Akpoti-Uduaghan listed as the sole defendant.
According to court documents, the government is charging the senator under Section 391 of the Penal Code (Cap 89, Laws of the Federation, 1990) for allegedly “making imputation knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm the reputation of a person.”
The said comments were allegedly made during a live broadcast of Channels Television’s ‘Politics Today’ on April 3, 2025, where Akpoti-Uduaghan was said to have criticised unnamed individuals in a manner the government claimed was defamatory.
Count two of the charges accused Akpoti-Uduaghan of “making an imputation knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm the reputation of a person, contrary to Section 391 of the Penal Code Law, Cap. 89, Laws of the Federation, 1990, and punishable under Section 392 of the same Law.
“That you, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, on or about the 3rd day of April 2025, during the same Politics Today programme on Channels Television in Abuja, Federal Capital Territory, made the following imputation concerning Yahaya Adoza Bello, former Governor of Kogi State.
“It was part of the meeting, the discussions that Akpabio had with Yahaya Bello that night to eliminate me. When he met with him, he then emphasised that I should be killed, but I should be killed in Kogi.
“You knew or had reason to believe that such imputations would harm the reputation of Yahaya Adoza Bello, former Governor of Kogi State”, the charge added.
Among the witnesses lined up to testify include Senate President Godswill Akpabio and former Kogi State governor Yahaya Bello, who are identified in court filings as the nominal complainants.
Other witnesses listed include Senator Asuquo Ekpenyong, Sandra Duru, and police investigators Maya Iliya and Abdulhafiz Garba, who were involved in probing the matter.
The former Kogi governor had in April, petitioned the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), accusing Akpoti-Uduaghan, of making defamatory statements against him.
The former Kogi governor alleged that during a homecoming event on April 1, 2025, in Okehi Local Government Area, the female lawmaker ‘maliciously’ defamed him and accused him of being involved in an assassination plot.
The case comes amid ongoing political tensions surrounding Akpoti-Uduaghan, who was suspended from the Senate earlier this year. Her suspension sparked widespread criticism and allegations of political persecution.
Akpoti-Uduaghan had accused Akpabio of targeting her after she rejected his alleged sexual advances, claiming that her suspension was orchestrated to silence her.
She made the allegations following the altercation over sitting arrangement in the Senate Chamber that led to Akpabio ordering the sergeant-at-arms to eject her from the chamber when she rejected the seat offered to her.
She is challenging her suspension at the Federal High Court, where the hearing has been scheduled for June 27.
Source: ICIR
The Supreme Court has vacated the order of the Court of Appeal which barred the recognition of David Mark as the National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress, ADC.
The apex court on Thursday held that the preservative order by the Court of Appeal was in bad faith, unnecessary, unwarranted and improper.
In a unanimous judgment of the Supreme Court, Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba held that the Court of Appeal ought not to have made such order because it was not sought by any of the parties in the matter.
The Court of Appeal had issued an order of status quo antem bellum upon which the ADC exco under David Mark was de-recognized by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
With the vacation of the order, David Mark and the other national officers are to be recognized as ADC leaders by the electoral body.
The convention produced the Tanimu Turaki-led factional national executives of the party.
Attention has shifted to the Supreme Court, which has fixed April 30 (today) for judgment in the leadership tussle within the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
A five-member panel led by Justice Mohammed Garba will resolve the appeal filed by the David Mark-led faction concerning the authentic leadership of the party.
Also on Thursday, the court is expected to determine the leadership dispute rocking the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
Two PDP factions—one led by Kabir Turaki and the other by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike—are laying claim to the leadership of the party.
The Supreme Court had on April 22 reserved judgment in the ADC crisis to a date to be communicated to the parties involved in the tussle.
However, on Tuesday, the ADC formally wrote to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, pleading for the quick delivery of judgment in the leadership tussle at the national level.
The party claimed it would suffer irreparable harm if judgment in the protracted battle was not delivered within the period allowed by the Electoral Act for fielding candidates for the 2027 general elections.
It stated in part: “Without the delivery of judgment within the next three days from the date of this letter, the ADC stands the grave and irreversible risk of being excluded from participating in the 2027 general elections.
“This would disenfranchise millions of Nigerians who have subscribed to the ideals of the ADC and deny them their constitutional right to freely associate and contest elections through a political party of their choice.”
At the April 22 hearing, Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, who represented David Mark, urged the Supreme Court to allow the appeal, arguing that the apex court had earlier, on March 21, 2025, held that “no court has jurisdiction to entertain matters bordering on the internal affairs of political parties.”
During the hearing, Okutepa urged the apex court to hold that the Federal High Court in Abuja lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
However, Robert Emukperu, SAN, who represented the first respondent, Nafiu Gombe, urged the court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment of the lower court, which held that the suit was premature.
It will be recalled that a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal dismissed Mark’s appeal, ruling that it was premature and filed without leave of the trial court.
In the PDP matter, the first appeal, marked SC/CV/164/2026, stems from a decision of Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, who restrained the party from proceeding with its planned convention pending the determination of a suit filed by former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido.
On November 14, the court issued a final order restraining the PDP from conducting its national convention.
Justice Lifu held that Lamido was “unjustly denied” the opportunity to obtain a nomination form to contest for national chairman, in violation of the PDP constitution and internal regulations.
The Court of Appeal later upheld the decision on March 9, prompting the PDP to appeal.
The second appeal, SC/CV/166/2026, was filed by the PDP, its National Working Committee (NWC), and National Executive Committee (NEC).
It arose from a judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho, which stopped the party from holding its Ibadan national convention.
The Court of Appeal upheld that decision, agreeing that INEC should not validate the outcome of the convention.
After hearing all arguments, the Supreme Court reserved judgment, stating that the date would be communicated to the parties.
