In a significant legal and political setback for Senate President Godswill Akpabio, the Court of Appeal in Abuja has not only thrown out his attempts to challenge a lower court ruling favouring Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan but has also imposed a punitive financial cost directly on him.
A three-judge panel, led by Justice Hamman Barka, delivered the sharp rebuke on May 21st, 2025. The court formally struck out two motions filed by Akpabio after his legal team abruptly sought to withdraw the entire appeal. Crucially, the court awarded costs of ₦100,000 (One Hundred Thousand Naira) against Akpabio personally, payable to Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, the first respondent in the case.
Akpabio’s withdrawn motions, filed on March 3rd and March 25th, 2025 (CV/395/M1/2025 and CV/395/M2/2025), revealed the depth of his legal manoeuvring aimed squarely at halting proceedings initiated by Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan in the Federal High Court. The motions sought extraordinary reliefs: Akpabio requested the appellate court grant him extra time and special permission to appeal against Justice Obiora Egwuatu’s March 10th, 2025, ruling in the case Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan v. Clerk of the National Assembly & 3 Others (FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025). Critically, he sought this leave to appeal on “grounds of mixed law and fact,” a higher threshold requiring court approval.
Most significantly, Akpabio sought an order from the Appeal Court to completely freeze (“stay further proceedings”) the ongoing Federal High Court case presided over by Justice Egwuatu. This freeze was requested pending the outcome of Akpabio’s own intended appeal – an appeal that hadn’t even been formally filed yet and for which he needed the court’s permission.
While the specifics of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s original suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025) remain central to the dispute, Akpabio’s motions confirm his direct interest in its outcome. The respondents listed alongside the Senate President were Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan herself, the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Senate as an institution, and Senator Neda Imasuem in his capacity as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions. This constellation points to a challenge likely concerning Senate procedures, privileges, or internal decisions affecting Akpoti-Uduaghan, where Akpabio’s leadership or the Senate’s actions were contested.
Faced with Akpabio’s eleventh-hour withdrawal request, the Court of Appeal panel wasted little time. Justice Barka’s ruling was concise and carried a sting: The application to withdraw the two motions was granted. The motions themselves were formally struck out. Costs of ₦100,000 were awarded against Akpabio, payable to Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan. The appeal number (CA/ABJ/PRE/ROA/CV/395M/2025) was marked for deletion.
Awarding costs directly against a sitting Senate President is a notable judicial action, signalling the court’s view that the motions lacked sufficient merit or justification to proceed, warranting a penalty. Akpabio’s primary objective – halting the Federal High Court case via a stay of proceedings – has collapsed entirely with the withdrawal and striking out. This clears the path for Justice Egwuatu’s court to potentially resume or continue hearing Akpoti-Uduaghan’s substantive case unimpeded.
The sudden withdrawal suggests Akpabio’s legal team saw little chance of success at the Appeal Court level regarding the requested leave and stay, forcing a retreat that still incurred financial penalty. For the nation’s number three citizen to face a personal costs order in a legal battle against a fellow Senator is politically awkward, potentially undermining authority and raising questions about the Senate’s internal governance.
