Senate ethics panel rejects Natasha’s petition on procedural grounds

The Senate Ethics Committee has declined to entertain the petition on sexual harassment presented by Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, citing procedural violations and existing legal constraints.

According to the Committee Chairman, Neda Imasuen, Senate Rule Book Order 40(4) explicitly states that a senator cannot submit a petition signed by themselves; instead, it must be presented by another senator. This fundamental rule rendered Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s petition inadmissible from the outset.

Additionally, the committee noted that the petition contained allegations that are currently under judicial review, making it ineligible for deliberation in accordance with Senate procedures. Parliamentary norms dictate that matters pending before the courts should not be subject to legislative discussion to avoid judicial interference.

Furthermore, a legal notice from M.J. Numa and Partners attempted to prevent the committee from proceeding with its deliberations. However, the committee stressed that the principle of separation of powers ensures the Senate’s autonomy in governing its internal affairs.

Therefore, the petition was dismissed strictly on procedural grounds, and the committee will continue evaluating other matters presented before it, ultimately reporting its findings to the full Senate.

In closing, Senator Imasuen reaffirmed the committee’s commitment to upholding order and decorum in the legislative chamber. Seating arrangements and procedural guidelines exist to ensure smooth proceedings, and any breach of protocol is taken seriously.

The incident involving Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan was described as unfortunate, but the committee assured that its final recommendations would be guided by Senate regulations and the testimonies provided.

At the committee’s seating, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan was conspicuously absent as the chairman ruled that, after its announcement at plenary earlier in which Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan was in attendance, it was expected she would have made herself available. However, probably on the instruction of her legal team, she declined to show up.