Why is Federal Government Suing Senator Natasha?

The controversy surrounding lawmaker, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, is yet to be over soon.

The suspended senator representing Kogi Central, who has been embroiled in one matter or the other with the Senate president, Senator Godswill Akpabio, now has a case to answer at the court.

The Federal Government has filed a lawsuit against her over alleged defamatory comments she made during a live television interview.

According to court documents, the case – marked CR/297/25 – was filed on May 16, 2025, before the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Abuja.

The FG alleges that the senator made statements that could “harm the reputation of a person,” an offence under Section 391 of the Penal Code, and punishable under Section 392.

The incident in question took place on April 3, 2025, during a live appearance on Channels Television’s Politics Today.

During the broadcast, Akpoti-Uduaghan made serious allegations, including:

“Senate President Akpabio instructed Yahaya Bello to coordinate an attempt to assassinate me outside Abuja so it would look like a local mob attack.”

This statement is now at the center of the FG’s case, with Senate President Godswill Akpabio and former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello named as nominal complainants and expected to testify in court.

Other listed witnesses include Senator Asuquo Ekpenyong, activist Sandra Duru, and two investigating police officers, Maya Iliya and Abdulhafiz Garba.

Senator Natasha has maintained that her suspension from the Senate on March 6, 2025, for what was described as “gross misconduct” was politically motivated and aimed at silencing her. She has also insisted that her claims, including those of sexual harassment and threats to her life, have not been taken seriously by the Senate leadership.

In response to her accusations, both Akpabio and Bello filed petitions to the Inspector-General of Police, urging legal action over what they describe as “criminal defamation, false accusation, and conduct likely to cause a breach of peace.”

As the case unfolds, all eyes will be on the courtroom– and the larger questions it raises about freedom of speech, political accountability, and the limits of parliamentary criticism.