Natasha’s suspension is in order – Nasarawa APC chair

Thursday’s decision of the Senate to suspend Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months is in order, Aliyu Bello, Nasarawa State Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), has said.

The lawmaker had submitted a petition alleging she had been sexually harassed by the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio.

Natasha first raised the alarm on February 28.

However, the Senate dismissed her petition on procedural grounds as the ethics committee recommended her suspension, saying she had brought ridicule to the upper chamber.

PDP Condemns Natasha’s Suspension, says Akpabio must be probed

Enough of the Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan Distraction, Nigeria is much more

Reacting to the development, Bello, in an opinion piece said the Senate’s Standing Orders and Code of Conduct mandate discipline for actions deemed disruptive or contemptuous.

The piece, titled ‘Akpabio, Natasha, and Senate: A question of rules, not gender’, reads in part: “The recent suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan (PDP, Kogi Central) has sparked a polarized debate, with some critics alleging gender bias against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.

“While concerns about gender inequality in politics deserve serious attention, conflating routine legislative discipline with systemic marginalization risks trivializing genuine struggles for equity.

“A closer examination of precedent and procedure reveals that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension aligns with the Senate’s longstanding commitment to institutional order—a principle applied irrespective of gender.

“The Nigerian Senate has a well-documented history of suspending members—male and female—who breach its rules. In 2018, Senator Ovie Omo-Agege (APC, Delta Central) was suspended for 90 days after criticizing amendments to the Electoral Act. Similarly, Senator Abdul Ningi (PDP, Bauchi Central) faced suspension in 2012 for accusing then-Senate President David Mark of receiving a “N500 million monthly allowance.”

“More recently, in 2023, Senator Abdul Ahmed Ningi was suspended for three months over budget padding allegations. These cases, all involving male senators, were met with scrutiny but no claims of gender discrimination. Why, then, should Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s case be framed differently?

“The Senate’s Standing Orders and Code of Conduct mandate discipline for actions deemed disruptive or contemptuous. The institution’s credibility hinges on enforcing these rules uniformly. To insinuate that Senator Akpabio singled out a female colleague for punitive measures ignores both history and due process.

“Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension followed allegations of misconduct during plenary, which the Senate leadership contends violated parliamentary decorum. While the specifics of her case remain debated, the process leading to her suspension mirrors past precedents.”

It continued: “Without any modicum of ambiguity, Nigerians believe that invoking gender bias without evidence undermines the Senate’s autonomy to regulate its affairs and risks weaponizing identity politics to evade accountability.

“It is worth noting that female senators, including the late Senator Stella Oduah, have previously faced disciplinary actions without accusations of misogyny. This underscores that the Senate’s disciplinary mechanisms are gender-blind, prioritizing institutional integrity over individual identity.

“Advocates for gender equality rightfully push for greater representation and fairness in governance. However, crying “marginalization” in every instance involving a woman risks diluting legitimate claims of bias.

“Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, like her male counterparts, is subject to the same rules governing legislative conduct. To demand exemption from these standards on the basis of gender is to advocate for special treatment, not equality.

“Moreover, politicizing disciplinary actions distracts from substantive discussions about gender inclusion. Nigeria’s National Assembly has only 4 women among 109 senators—a glaring imbalance that demands systemic solutions, such as electoral reforms and party policy changes. Framing Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension as a gender issue shifts focus away from these structural challenges.

“Senate President Godswill Akpabio, like his predecessors, is tasked with maintaining parliamentary decorum. His role requires impartial enforcement of rules, regardless of a senator’s gender, ethnicity, or political affiliation. To allege otherwise is to presume malicious intent without justification.

“The Senate’s bipartisan decision-making process in disciplinary matters further negates claims of personal vendettas.

“The Nigerian Senate is far from perfect, but its disciplinary mechanisms are not inherently discriminatory. Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension should be assessed on its procedural merits, not sensationalized as a gender issue.

“Contrary to claims by those sympathetic to Senator Natasha and as rightly captured by thr Senate Chief Whip, Senator Tahir Munguno, who cited Order 40(4), the Senate rules must be strictly adhered to, or else lawlessness would reign supreme.

“Senator Munguno insisted that the Senate must “stamp its feet in defense of its rules,” emphasizing that no matter pending before a court of law should be deliberated upon by the Senate, as it would be deemed sub judice.

“Most significantly, Munguno further pointed out that Senate rules prohibit any senator from presenting a petition personally signed by themselves, stating, “Senator Natasha had signed her own petition, rendering it procedurally invalid.”

“If critics wish to challenge the Senate’s decision, let them do so through substantive debates about evidence and process—not divisive identity politics.

“In fact, the recent criticism of the Senate by former Senate President Bukola Saraki, lamenting the erosion of the institution’s “integrity, sanctity, and public perception”, has reignited debates about his moral standing to pontificate on legislative propriety.

“While Saraki’s concerns about institutional decline may appear valid, his capacity to credibly champion these values is undermined by his own controversial stewardship as senate president from 2015 to 2019.

“A dispassionate analysis of his tenure reveals a paradox: the man now preaching institutional sanctity presided over one of the most divisive and scandal-ridden eras in Nigeria’s legislative history.

“Saraki’s ascendancy to the senate presidency in 2015 was itself mired in controversy. He defied his party (the ruling APC) to secure the position through a backdoor alliance with opposition senators, a move critics labeled as a betrayal of party discipline and democratic norms. This set the tone for a tenure punctuated by allegations of institutional impropriety.

“Saraki’s protracted legal battle over alleged false asset declaration—a case that originated from his time as Kwara State Governor—cast a long shadow over his Senate presidency. Though he was eventually acquitted in 2018, the spectacle of a sitting Senate President standing trial for corruption eroded public trust in the institution.

“To cut a long narrative short, Saraki’s statement implicitly positions him as a guardian of legislative integrity. However, his record complicates this narrative. To accuse the current Senate of tarnishing the institution’s image while overlooking his own role in deepening public cynicism smacks of selective amnesia.

“Even the sexual harassment allegations the suspended lawmaker leveled against Senator Akpabio is neither here or there. Any discerning mind should ask why Natasha refused to bring to light an incidence that occurred in 2023, only to cry foul when she realized the enormity of her action brought to scrutiny before the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public that finally recommended her six months suspension.

“Certainly, Nigerians must seek to ask why Senator Natasha should refuse to obey standing Senate rules regarding sitting arrangements, when even two-term senators who were also former state governors, who by age could have been her father, saw the need to obey the same Senate rules.

“It is indeed clear that Natasha only whipped up her sexual harassment allegations against the senate president as a face saving, especially that her petition lacks any substance. By now, going by the level of noise she is making, Nigerians expected her to at least justify her claim by presenting her evidence, rather than making spurious allegations.

“It is note worthy that in a Senate of 109 lawmakers, not a single voice rose against the suspension ot Senator Natasha, not even the members of her political party.

“Furthermore, I am of the strong view that exonerating Senate President Akpabio is not to dismiss gender equality but to affirm that the Senate’s rules must apply equally to all, especially that true progress lies in addressing systemic barriers to women’s participation, not in manipulating isolated incidents to fuel unnecessary divisions.”