Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
Abuja — The ongoing controversy between Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan over allegations of sexual harassment has escalated into a high-stakes legal battle. On 5 December 2025, Akpabio filed a defamation suit at the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Abuja, demanding ₦200 billion in damages, a public apology, and the retraction of the accusations made against him. The suit contends that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s public claims have severely tarnished his reputation and misrepresented his character to the Nigerian public.
In a statement released by his media aide, Jackson Udom, Akpabio urged Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan to submit any evidence she claims to possess through proper legal channels rather than using social media platforms to air allegations. According to the statement, the defamation suit was filed several months ago, contradicting the senator’s suggestion that it was recently instituted. Court officials reportedly made multiple attempts to serve her with the legal processes, but when these attempts failed, substituted service was authorized to ensure the case proceeded.
“The allegations remain unproven and have never been presented before any formal panel or authority,” Udom stated, emphasizing that matters of such gravity require lawful procedures rather than public spectacle. Akpabio described the public discussion of the claims as “drama” and stressed that the courts, rather than social media, provide the appropriate forum for adjudicating such disputes. He further reinforced that the lawsuit is meant to safeguard his integrity and uphold the rule of law.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan has confirmed receipt of the suit and expressed readiness to present her case before the court. She views the legal proceedings as an opportunity to be heard formally, given that her earlier complaint to the Senate Ethics and Privileges Committee in March 2025 was dismissed on procedural grounds. At that time, the Senate committee ruled that she could not petition on her own behalf, citing legislative rules, and recommended her suspension for six months due to alleged “disorderly conduct,” including refusing to sit in her designated seat during plenary sessions. Many civil society groups and women’s rights advocates criticized this decision, arguing it curtailed her access to justice and failed to adequately address serious harassment allegations.
The case has drawn significant attention nationwide. Advocacy groups and human rights organizations have voiced concerns about institutional bias and the broader implications of silencing harassment claims, particularly against high-ranking public officials. Demonstrations under the slogan “We are all Natasha” have highlighted public demand for accountability and transparent mechanisms to investigate harassment within government institutions.
Legal analysts note that the scope of the defamation suit — particularly the high damages sought — is unusual in Nigeria and may set a precedent for how allegations of sexual harassment and defamation involving public officials are handled. Observers caution that the outcome could either encourage victims to seek formal recourse or deter legitimate complaints due to fear of retaliation.
For Akpabio, a favorable judgment would reinforce the principle that unsubstantiated public accusations carry consequences, potentially discouraging the use of social media for defamatory claims. Conversely, for Akpoti-Uduaghan, successfully presenting her evidence in court could affirm the judiciary’s role in protecting victims of harassment and holding powerful figures accountable, even within Nigeria’s complex political environment.
The matter is now before the FCT High Court in Abuja, with both parties preparing for what promises to be a protracted and closely watched legal battle. The case highlights the tension between political authority, public perception, and individual rights, underscoring the critical need for legal channels capable of delivering impartial justice.
This legal confrontation also raises broader questions about the treatment of harassment claims in male-dominated institutions, the responsibilities of lawmakers in addressing allegations against their peers, and the role of civil society in demanding accountability. Observers have emphasized that the resolution of this case could influence Nigeria’s approach to sexual harassment, defamation, and political conduct for years to come.
While both sides await court proceedings, Akpabio’s message is clear: allegations must be substantiated with evidence or face legal consequences. Meanwhile, Akpoti-Uduaghan asserts her readiness to use the court as a platform for truth and accountability. The FCT High Court’s handling of this high-profile case is expected to have lasting implications for legal and political norms in Nigeria, signaling how allegations against public officials are investigated, adjudicated, and ultimately resolved.
The nation watches closely as Nigeria’s judiciary prepares to navigate a complex and sensitive dispute that balances individual reputations, the rights of victims, and the public’s interest in transparency and justice. The outcome will likely shape both public discourse and the legal landscape surrounding harassment allegations in political spaces, reinforcing the principle that all claims — regardless of the status of the individuals involved — must be addressed with evidence, fairness, and due process.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments