Senator Natasha Hadiza Akpoti-Uduaghan has filed a counter-affidavit at the Supreme Court of Nigeria, opposing an application brought by the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, over proceedings already concluded at the Court of Appeal.
Court documents sighted in Abuja on Monday show that the counter-affidavit was deposed to by Rolland Onyenwe Okezie, a Senior Legislative Aide to Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, and filed in response to Senator Akpabio’s Motion on Notice dated January 21, 2026.
Referring to the appeal with Akpabio as appellant and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, and the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Senator Neda Imasuen, as respondents, she urged the apex court to dismiss the application in its entirety, describing it as lacking in merit and amounting to an abuse of court process.
According to the deponent, the Court of Appeal concluded hearing in the substantive appeal on November 28, 2025, and reserved the matter for judgment, arguing that the Senate President’s decision to approach the Supreme Court at this stage was improper.
“The Court of Appeal has already heard and concluded arguments in the appeal and reserved same for judgment,” the deponent averred, adding that “the applicant’s action is aimed at interfering with a subsisting appellate process that has reached an advanced stage.”
The affidavit maintained that Senator Akpabio was afforded ample opportunity to present his case before the lower court in strict compliance with the Rules of Court, adding that the brief of argument filed by Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan was properly before the Court of Appeal, procedurally compliant, and was never formally challenged during the hearing of the appeal.
“The brief of argument filed on behalf of the 1st respondent complied fully with the Court of Appeal Rules and was duly admitted by the court,” the affidavit stated.
A key issue raised in the counter-affidavit relates to an alleged violation of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2021, which limit briefs of argument to a maximum of 35 pages. It contended that while the briefs filed by Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, the Clerk of the National Assembly, and another respondent complied with the prescribed limit, the brief filed by Senator Akpabio exceeded the allowable pages and further alleged that the appellant failed to regularise the defect within the time allowed by the Rules.
“The applicant’s brief of argument exceeded the number of pages permitted by the Rules and was not regularised within the prescribed period,” the deponent averred, adding that the Court of Appeal was therefore right to decline its admission and proceed on the basis of valid processes.
On the substantive appeal, it argued that the grounds relied upon by Senator Akpabio raised issues of mixed law and fact, for which prior leave of court was mandatory.
“No leave of court was sought or obtained before filing the said grounds of appeal,” the affidavit stated, insisting that the appeal was incompetent ab initio.
Addressing complaints relating to adjournment and alleged denial of fair hearing, it noted that the grant or refusal of an adjournment lies within the discretionary powers of the court.
“The Court of Appeal exercised its discretion judicially and judiciously, and the applicant was not denied fair hearing at any stage of the proceedings,” the deponent averred.
The senator urged the Supreme Court to dismiss the application, describing it as a deliberate attempt to delay or frustrate the delivery of judgment by the Court of Appeal.
