The Senate is set to deliberate on Tuesday, the controversy surrounding the recall of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan (PDP, Kogi Central), whose six-month suspension has been declared unconstitutional by a Federal High Court in Abuja.

The matter has sparked differing interpretations of the court’s judgment, deepening the standoff between the Senator and the Senate leadership.

The dispute gained momentum after Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, through her legal team at M.J. Numa & Partners LLP, wrote to the Senate leadership on July 11, citing the judgment of Justice Binta Nyako delivered on July 4, 2025.

In the letter, she demanded her immediate reinstatement, arguing that her continued suspension violates Section 63 of the 1999 Constitution and denies her constituents proper representation.

The letter, titled “RE: Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025 – Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan v. The Clerk of the National Assembly & Ors.: Forwarding of Court Order and Demand for Compliance,” stressed that the court had made a “definitive pronouncement” in Order 10 of its judgment, declaring the suspension “excessive, overreaching, and inconsistent” with the law.

Consequently, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan formally notified the Senate of her intention to resume plenary duties on Tuesday, July 15, 2025, in line with what she and her legal team view as the clear and binding directives of the court.

Reacting to the letter, Senate spokesperson Senator Yemi Adaramodu issued a press statement on Sunday firmly stating that the court judgment did not contain any enforceable or mandatory order directing the immediate recall of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan.

According to Senator Adaramodu, the Certified True Copy of the judgment delivered by Justice Binta Nyako merely included “advisory observations” regarding the length of the suspension, which, he said, are not binding or enforceable in law.

“The enrolled order clearly demonstrates that the Senate’s disciplinary powers under Section 60 of the Constitution remain intact and were not invalidated,” he stated. “Nowhere in the judgment did the court issue a declaratory or injunctive order mandating her recall.”

Nevertheless, the Senate has acknowledged receipt of the court judgment and pledged to debate it and adopt a “constitutionally informed position” on the matter, which will be communicated to Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan and the public.

Sources in the National Assembly disclosed that several senators, cutting across party and regional lines, have expressed concern over the prolonged suspension and its implications for legislative independence and constituent representation. Former Bayelsa State Governor and current senator, Seriake Dickson, remarked in an interview that “ensuring full representation of constituencies is a matter of national concern.”

Observers believe Tuesday’s debate could become a test case for balancing the constitutional powers of the legislature to discipline its members against the judiciary’s role in protecting individual rights and democratic representation.

The outcome could also shape future interpretations of the Senate’s authority under Section 60 of the Constitution and the extent to which the judiciary can intervene in internal legislative affairs.