Senate President Godswill Akpabio has finally defended himself against allegations of sexual harassment by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, saying at no time did he ever attempt it.
Reiterating his respect for women in general, Akpabio, who said he was aware that the matters were in court, strongly insisted on clearing the air of the falsehood trending about him.
The comments came as the Senate Committee on Ethics, Code of Conduct and Public Petitions, on Wednesday, threw out Akpoti-Uduaghan’s petition against Akpabio.
Confusion attended Wednesday’s sitting, as Akpabio asked the committee to commence investigation into the allegation of sexual harassment levelled against him.
The development followed the presentation of a petition personally written by Akpoti-Uduaghan to the senate at plenary, which was monitored by a delegation of a United Kingdom parliamentarian led by a woman, Kate Ofunne Osamor.
Akpoti-Uduaghan, who arrived at the National Assembly complex with her husband, Chief Emmanuel Uduaghan, entered the chamber after sharing kisses.
But attempts by Leader of the Senate, Opeyemi Bamidele, and Chief Whip, Tahir Monguno, to make Akpabio reverse his decision to allow the investigation by the panel failed.
Bamidele and Monguno had quoted the relevant rules of the senate to try to convince Akpabio to rescind his decision on the matter because it was against the practice of the red chamber to allow petitions personally written and signed by a serving senator.
Akpabio acknowledged their observations but insisted the decision will not be reversed. He even refused to allow the senate to dissolve into a closed session because of the foreign and local visitors, who were observing the proceeding.
The senate president described Akpoti-Uduaghan’s sexual harassment allegation as spurious, saying he has highest regard for women.
He stated, “In February 2025, there were some spurious allegations making the rounds in the social media and on television of a purported harassment by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
“While I am aware that the matters are in court, however, I would like to state clearly that at no time did I ever attempt any sexual harassment.
“I have my siblings who were raised very well by my late single mother through very difficult times. She died in the year 2000. I, therefore, have the highest regards for women.
“I also wish to say that I have four beautiful daughters. At no time will I ever harass any woman. I never do so. In addition, even as a state governor, I was awarded various awards. One of them was ‘the most gender-friendly governor’ in Nigeria.
“I served between 2007 and 2015. In conclusion, I urge all Nigerians, particularly, the media and members of the social media to await the court’s decision. Please, do not jump to conclusions on this allegation.”
The UK parliamentarian delegation, led by Osamor of Edmonton and Winchmore Hill, also had Members of Parliament for Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale, Rt. Hon. David Mundell, and Member of Parliament for Westminster North, Dame Karen Buck.
The rest were from the House of Lords, Lord Jonathan Oates; Member of Parliament for Worthing West, Dr. Beccy Cooper; and Member of Parliament for Plymouth Moor View, Rt. Hon. Fred Thomas, among others.
The senator for Ekiti North Senatorial District, Cyril Fasuyi, vowed to come up with a petition against Akpoti-Uduaghan, who had allegedly claimed that former Ekiti State Governor, Kayode Fayemi, sold the Ajaokuta steel company, when he was a minister.
But in a statement by head of Fayemi’s media office, Mallam Ahmad Sajoh, the former governor denied reports that Akpoti-Uduaghan had once accused him of sexual harassment.
The statement said, “We wish to categorically state that this report is inaccurate and a misrepresentation of the actual comments made by the Distinguished Senator from Ekiti. Upon reviewing the proceedings, it is evident that Senator Fasuyi never made such an allegation.
“Instead, what he actually stated was that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan had, in the past, made false and defamatory claims against Dr. Fayemi when he served as Minister of Mines and Steel Development, specifically, regarding issues related to the Ajaokuta Steel Company.
“At no point did Senator Fasuyi link Dr. Fayemi to any allegations of sexual misconduct by Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan.”
Sajoh added, “For the avoidance of doubt, we wish to reiterate that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan – or anyone else, for that matter – has never accused Dr. Fayemi of any form of sexual misconduct.”
Early on Wednesday, a Federal High Court in Abuja restrained Senate Committee on Code of Conduct and Public Petitions from probing the senator for Kogi Central Senatorial District, Akpoti-Uduaghan, over alleged disorder regarding reallocation of seats in the chamber.
Justice Obiora Egwuatu, who granted the interim injunction, among others, ordered the National Assembly, Senate, and Senate Committee on Ethics to suspend the hearing scheduled for Wednesday.
The defendants, including Clerk to the National Assembly, Clerk of the Senate, and Committee on Ethics, were to show cause within 72 hours why an interlocutory injunction to stop the hearing should not be granted.
The court action was sequel to the decision of the senate, through its ethics committee, to probe the allegations of misconduct against Akpoti-Uduaghan during plenary last week.
The ethics panel had asked Akpoti-Uduaghan to appear before it to answer questions on the alleged misconduct during plenary.
The committee chaired by Senator Neda Imasuen shunned the court order and sat on the matter after plenary on Wednesday.
The panel listened to a presentation by the senate spokesperson, Adeyemi Adaramodu, who had moved the motion on the floor that led to the senate’s resolution to probe Akpoti-Uduaghan’s alleged misconduct through the ethics panel.
Adaramodu lamented that the actions of Akpoti-Uduaghan, through the interviews she granted to the media, had negatively affected the image of the senate.
Chairman, Senate Committee on Rules and Business, Senator Titus Zam, also made a presentation before the panel.
Zam debunked claims that Akpabio was deliberately frustrating Akpoti-Uduaghan’s motions and bills because of her alleged refusal to accept the senate president’s sexual advances.
Similarly, Head of the Sergeant-at-Arms in the chamber, Mr. Muktar Daudawa, made a presentation before the panel, and explained that the issue of seat reallocation was a normal routine in the chamber. Daudawa stated that Akpoti-Uduaghan was not the only senator affected.
The chairman of the committee said the Kogi Central senator, probably, did not honour the panel’s invitation because she was obviously obeying her lawyers’ legal advice.
Imasuen said the judiciary, a different arm of government, could not interfere in the affairs of the legislature, hence, the court order obtained by Akpoti-Uduaghan was not binding on the committee.
He also declared that the Kogi Central senator’s petition, referred to by the senate president, was dead on arrival.
Imasuen stated, “In the plenary on the floor of the senate, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan presented a petition before the senate. There were a lot of objections to that petition because of the manner in which it came. But in the wisdom of the senate president, it was still referred to us, to this committee.
“And for us to save time, because we need to report back to the senate tomorrow (Thursday), I will address that petition. But I will go through our rules and our standing orders, as amended.
“That petition, for what you read on the floor and for what I’ve seen, is making some allegations that are already in court.
“The matter is already in court. And it is the procedure of this committee. As a matter of fact, the first thing we ask when the petition comes before us is whether or not that petition is before any law court. If the answer is yes, we do not touch such petitions.
“In addition to that, our Rule Book, also, under Order 40, has laid down the processes that must be followed before a petition is laid. And if you will allow me, Order 40 of our Rule Book, Subsection 4, says that no senator may present to the senate a petition signed by him or herself.
“In other words, I cannot submit a petition about myself, signed by myself. That petition ought to be presented by another senator. And I’m sure that there are three senators from Kogi State, as it is with other states.
“The issue before us today is the issue of an alleged misconduct of one of our distinguished senators on the floor of the senate.
“The petition she presented today is actually dead on arrival. I say that because it runs contrary to Order 40, Subsection 4, that no senator should present to the senate a petition signed by him or herself. And that petition, having been signed by her, will not be entertained by this committee.
“She (Akpoti-Uduaghan) is not here. Now I can understand why she’s not here. She’s probably not here on the order of her lawyers. That being the case, the committee will sit and we will deliberate on what we’ve gotten from distinguished senators that have presented their cases before us.
“We will use our rule books and all other documents that are available to us, to make a decision here and then make a referral to the full senate.”
A group, Kogi Central Concerned Stakeholders, also faulted Akpoti-Uduaghan’s action against Akpabio and had tendered an unreserved apology.
Convener of the group, AbdulRaheem Adeku, in an open letter to Akpabio, dissociated the district from Akpoti-Uduaghan’s actions.
Nevertheless, protesters, who were supporters of Akpoti-Uduaghan, on their way to Mopol gate of the National Assembly were chased away from the arcade, opposite Eagle Square.
The protesters were waiting for the arrival of others to enable them to converge on the entrance of the National Assembly. But they were dispersed with tear gas by security men, who were not in uniforms to ascertain whether they were policemen or soldiers.
Led by one of the lawyers to Akpoti-Uduaghan, Victor Giwa, the protesters, who carried placards, banners, and a national flag, had started arriving about 9am for the demonstration planned ahead of the resumption of plenary.
