Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s seven missteps

Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan entered the Nigerian Senate as a celebrated figure—an articulate, media-savvy lawmaker who had defied odds to emerge as the voice of her Kogi Central constituency.

However, her brief tenure has been overshadowed by a series of contentious actions that have cast doubt on her political maturity and respect for institutional order.

What started as a promise of vibrant representation has evolved into a swirl of controversy, marked by courtroom battles, disciplinary proceedings, and public spectacles.

Below are the seven strategic blunders that have defined her increasingly turbulent journey in the upper chamber of Nigeria’s legislature:

1. Defying Senate Seating Protocol

In what became her first public clash with the institution, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan refused to take her reassigned seat during plenary—a basic procedural change that nine other senators complied with quietly. Her refusal disrupted proceedings and drew a sharp rebuke from the Senate leadership.

The reassignment followed the defection of two senators, necessitating a realignment of seating arrangements. Rather than follow due legislative channels to voice her objection, she escalated the matter into a symbolic protest, framing it as persecution.

2. Making Sexual Harassment Allegations Without Evidence

Shortly after being summoned by the Senate’s disciplinary committee, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan appeared on national television and accused Senate President Godswill Akpabio of attempting to sexually harass her two years prior—at his family residence and in the presence of her husband.

While the nature of such an allegation requires careful attention, no evidence—no witness, record, or prior complaint—has been submitted to back her claims. Her petition, initially rejected for procedural flaws, was later refiled but still failed to present a prima facie case. The timing, context, and lack of documentation have fueled skepticism, with critics accusing her of politicizing a serious issue for personal leverage.

3. Alleging an Assassination Plot Without Proof

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s public claim that Senate President Akpabio and former Kogi Governor Yahaya Bello plotted to assassinate her raised the stakes—and eyebrows. Without presenting any supporting documentation, audio, or witnesses, the statement was seen as dangerously inflammatory.

READ ALSO: Senate upholds Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension until recess ends

Both men have since initiated defamation proceedings. Legal experts have noted that while public officials should expect scrutiny, accusations of criminal conspiracy must be accompanied by clear evidence—not just emotionally charged rhetoric.

4. Turning Apology Into Political Satire

In a bid to defuse tensions, the senator issued what she described as an apology. Instead, the statement was a sarcastic, satirical piece that mocked Senate procedures and ridiculed its leadership.

The tone, widely panned as flippant, deepened institutional resentment and was seen as trivializing a serious conflict.

Rather than rebuild trust, the apology further alienated her from colleagues who had already expressed concerns about her combative approach to legislative engagement.

5. Snubbing the Senate Ethics Committee

When summoned by the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan refused to appear. Her absence was viewed as a direct affront to Senate authority.

Critics argue that her non-compliance undermined not only the integrity of the disciplinary process but also her own credibility.

It also foreclosed a chance for her to clarify her position, seek resolution, or make amends—opportunities that might have tempered the Senate’s eventual disciplinary actions.

6. Making Organ Harvesting Allegations Without Basis

In what many see as the most outrageous claim of all, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan linked the Senate President to the killing of Iniubong Umoren, a young job seeker murdered in Akwa Ibom in 2021, and alleged a sinister connection to organ harvesting.

No evidence—medical, forensic, or testimonial—was cited to support the claim. Legal observers and human rights advocates alike condemned the statement as reckless and defamatory, warning that it could incite public fear without cause.

7. Misrepresenting Parliamentary Procedure

While defending her seating protest, the senator argued that Order Ten, which allows a senator to raise a point of order, could be invoked from any location on the Senate floor—even an unassigned seat.

That interpretation directly contradicts Senate rules, which require decorum and compliance with assigned positions during plenary.

Her reading of the rule was widely ridiculed by parliamentary experts, who saw it as evidence of either ignorance or deliberate distortion. In a rules-based institution, such a claim undermines the credibility of a lawmaker entrusted with interpreting and shaping national legislation.

Final Reflections: Symbolism Over Substance?

Despite her activist roots and appeal to a younger, digitally engaged electorate, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s early record in the Senate is increasingly seen as a case of symbolism overtaking substance.

Observers note that while she champions bold causes and thrives in the media spotlight, her lack of public administration experience may be affecting her ability to navigate the formal rigors of legislative duty.

“This is like sending a first-year law student to argue at the Supreme Court,” one political analyst said. “There is courage—but also chaos.”