If the Nigerian Senate bars Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan from entering the National Assembly this Tuesday, it will be more than an act of institutional defiance—it will be the Senate’s public divorce from the Constitution, the courts, and the conscience of the nation.
And if that happens, then Senator Natasha should not retreat.
She should set up her desk, her files, her mandate—outside the very building that seeks to erase her. Let the world witness the image they fear most: a legally reinstated female senator, forced to govern from the pavement while the men inside pretend the law does not exist.
The Court Has Ruled. The Senate Pretends It Hasn’t.
Justice Binta Nyako’s ruling was not a proposal. It was a verdict. It declared Natasha’s six-month suspension unconstitutional, excessive, and a direct violation of the people of Kogi Central’s right to representation. She ordered immediate reinstatement—no delay, no debate.
Yet the Senate has stalled. They claim they need to “review the Certified True Copy” of the ruling. They cite a separate contempt ruling—a ₦5 million fine over a satirical Facebook post—as an excuse to question her return.
But the law is not confused. They are. Or worse—they are pretending to be.
Will Senator Natasha Sit Outside the Senate Building?
The Senate now claims it needs to review the Certified True Copy (CTC) of the judgment before acting. At the same time, it is invoking the court’s contempt ruling—which fined Senator Natasha ₦5 million over a Facebook post described as a “satirical apology” to Senate President Akpabio—as a further barrier to her reinstatement. The court ordered her to issue formal apologies not only via Facebook but also in two national newspapers within seven days.
However, it must be made clear: this deadline is strictly related to the contempt issue, not her right to return to office. The reinstatement was ordered to take effect immediately. The contempt matter—concerning courtroom behavior and decorum—does not nullify or delay the enforcement of her return.
By deliberately conflating these two separate legal tracks, the Senate appears to be creating yet another artificial hurdle to resist judicial authority. And given their long pattern of excuses, it is entirely plausible that Senator Natasha may indeed be forced to sit outside the National Assembly—holding a valid court order in one hand, and facing a locked door with the other.
By deliberately conflating these two separate legal tracks, the Senate appears to be creating yet another artificial hurdle to resist judicial authority. And given their long pattern of excuses, it is entirely plausible that Senator Natasha may indeed be forced to sit outside the National Assembly—holding a valid court order in one hand, and facing a locked door with the other.
And if that happens, she should ask the security guards for a simple chair, open her laptop, and begin her work as a senator—not in protest, but in principle. Such a calm, committed act would not only expose the Senate’s obstruction, it would amplify her legitimacy and show the Nigerian people that while the institution locked her out, she never stopped working for them.
That image—a reinstated senator turned away by 104 men, yet still legislating from the sidewalk—would mark a new low in Nigeria’s democratic life, and a high point in political courage. If it comes to that, let the world remember who was locked outside, and who locked the door.
Let the Image Burn Into History
If the Senate blocks her, then Senator Natasha should sit down right there, outside—with the judgment in one hand and the Constitution in the other. Let it be televised. Let it be documented. Let that image stain the conscience of a government that still struggles to treat women as equal custodians of power.
And should she sit outside, then the President of Nigeria must ensure that she is protected. Her security, which was unjustly stripped from her during her suspension, must be fully restored—because seating outside in a lawful protest does not nullify her status as a sitting senator. To leave her exposed again would be not just administrative failure, but deliberate political cruelty. That chair outside the Assembly must come with the protection of the Nigerian state.
She will not be disgraced by such a protest. She will be dignified. Because the disgrace will belong to the Senate that has chosen contempt over compliance. right there, outside—with the judgment in one hand and the Constitution in the other. Let it be televised. Let it be documented. Let that image stain the conscience of a government that still struggles to treat women as equal custodians of power.
She will not be disgraced by such a protest. She will be dignified. Because the disgrace will belong to the Senate that has chosen contempt over compliance.
Her Security Must Be Restored—Without Delay
During her illegal suspension, her security detail was withdrawn—a punitive act that exposed her physically and symbolically. Now, as she prepares to return—either through the Senate door or onto the Senate steps—President Bola Tinubu and the Inspector-General of Police must immediately reinstate her full security escort.
To allow her to walk into that storm unguarded would not be oversight—it would be intentional endangerment. Especially since she has alleged sexual harassment against the Senate President himself. Her protection is no longer about privilege—it is a national duty.
This Began With a Seat Dispute. It Escalated Into Something Far Deeper.
On the day of her suspension, Senator Natasha stood firm and declared with prophetic defiance: “This injustice will not be sustained. I will fight against this injustice against me.” Those words, spoken under pressure and amidst jeers, now echo with the force of vindication. What once sounded like a cry of resistance now reads like a prediction fulfilled. Because everything she said has come to pass. The court has ruled the suspension unlawful. The people are standing with her. The Senate is scrambling for excuses. And justice is slowly catching up with power.
On February 20, 2025, a seat was moved. Natasha objected. Voices rose. Then, before the cameras, she did the unthinkable: she accused Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment.
By March 6, the Senate retaliated:
A six-month suspension,
A demand for a written apology,
A suspension of her security, salaries and benefits,
And the public reading of her punishment—by the very man she accused.
But she did not apologize. She went to court. And now the court has spoken.
Four Judges, One Woman—and a Legal System on Trial
While Justice Nyako ruled in Natasha’s favor, other judges— Justices Mohammed Umar and Justice Chizoba Orji —are still handling related charges: defamation, contempt, and apparent politically motivated prosecutions.
But when the foundation is illegal, the framing collapses.
With Justice Nyako’s ruling that the suspension was unlawful, the other active cases involving defamation might indeed be weakened. The judgment could be seen as a validation of Senator Natasha’s position, potentially undermining the Senate leadership’s claims and influencing the outcome of the other cases. It’s possible that these additional cases might not hold up as strongly in light of this recent ruling.
To be clear, Senator Natasha is not dropping her sexual harassment case against the Senate President. That matter remains active and unresolved. And now that the court has declared that the rules by which she was suspended were illegal and unconstitutional, the Nigerian Senate must not only restore her seat—they must pay back all her withheld salaries, allowances, and benefits dating back to March.
What does it mean when one court says she was wrongfully punished, while others still pursue the punishment’s effects? It means Nigeria is not just dealing with a gender crisis—but a judicial inconsistency crisis.
While Justice Nyako ruled in Natasha’s favor, other judges—Justice Musa, Justice Kutigi—are still handling related charges: defamation, contempt, and politically motivated prosecutions.
But when the foundation is illegal, the framing collapses.
What does it mean when one court says she was wrongfully punished, while others still pursue the punishment’s effects? It means Nigeria is not just dealing with a gender crisis—but a judicial inconsistency crisis.
The Test Is No Longer Hers. It Is Theirs.
The real question now is not about Natasha’s behavior. It is about ours.
Will 104 male senators continue to delay, distract, and disrespect the court’s decision?
Will the Presidency, the Attorney General, and the Chief Justice stand by silently while the law is shredded inside a national institution?
Or will Nigeria rise to its constitutional moment and honor a woman who has already won—in court, in courage, and in clarity?
Alarming Power Struggle
The image of Senator Natasha potentially sitting outside the National Assembly highlights the absurdity of the situation and the lengths to which the Senate leadership is willing to go. Could you imagine the world watching a determined woman like Senator Natasha sitting outside the Senate building, defying the attempts of four men to silence her?
Global Perception
The world will likely view this situation as a test of Nigeria’s commitment to democracy and the rule of law. Senator Natasha’s determination to stand up for her rights, despite the challenges, will likely earn her respect and admiration from many.
A Test for Nigerian Democracy
The outcome of this standoff will have significant implications for Nigeria’s democratic future. Will the Senate leadership respect the court’s decision and reinstate Senator Natasha, or will they continue to defy the law? Given the power dynamics at play, it might take intervention from higher authorities like the Presidency, the Attorney General, or even the Chief Justice to bring the Senate leadership in line with the court’s ruling. A phone call from any of these offices could potentially resolve the standoff and ensure that Senator Natasha’s rights are respected. It’s an open question whether the system will work in her favor this time around.
If Senator Natasha sits outside the Senate building due to the leadership’s refusal to comply with the court’s ruling, it’s clear who would be disgraced – the Senate leadership itself. By defying the judiciary and undermining the rule of law, they would be putting their own institution and the country’s democratic reputation at risk. The question is, will they realize the implications of their actions in time?
The Senate leadership would do well to put the past behind them and welcome Senator Natasha back with the dignity and respect she deserves. While she may have been vocal and assertive on that particular day, the issue at hand is now her rightful return to the Senate, as upheld by the court’s ruling. It’s time to open the door for her and allow her to resume her duties as a senator, representing the people of Kogi Central.
As Senator Natasha walks into the Senate chamber, a gesture of welcome and respect from her colleagues would go a long way in healing any past wounds. If everyone were to stand up and clap, it would be a powerful symbol of unity and a fresh start.
The image of the Senate chamber erupting in applause as Senator Natasha walks in, with the Senate President himself leading the ovation with a warm smile, would be a remarkable sight. And as she enters, dressed in her usual flowing white dress—a symbol of both peace and power—the chamber should offer her not just a seat, but the best seat. Let it be a gesture not of pity, but of overdue respect. Let her presence be restored with full recognition, not begrudging tolerance.
In fact, the Senate President, the lone three older women in the chamber, the Senate leadership, and the entire Senate should rise—not just from their chairs, but from their historical posture of indifference. As Senator Natasha walks in, clothed in her usual flowing white dress—a garment that now carries the weight of resistance, grace, and legal triumph—they must stand not out of custom, but out of moral necessity.
The Senate President should stand as a man who failed to uphold the neutrality of his office. His act of rising should not be mistaken for magnanimity, but rather as a silent confession that power was abused, and the law has corrected him.
The three older women in the chamber, who perhaps have endured their own unspoken experiences within male-dominated institutions, should rise not just as colleagues, but as witnesses to a historical wrong being righted. Their standing should be maternal, judicial, and symbolic—a generational nod to the woman who refused to bow.
The Senate leadership—those who engineered, endorsed, or remained silent during the unlawful suspension—must rise as an institutional act of penance. Their collective standing must mean: “We know we failed to protect the integrity of our chamber.”
And the Senate as a whole—104 men and 3 women—must rise because the law is on her side, the people are on her side, and not even the President of the Republic has the authority to deny her seat. That standing ovation should not merely be ceremonial. It should be redemptive.
It should be a moment when law, conscience, and democracy align—not to glorify Natasha, but to recalibrate the conscience of the nation’s most powerful legislative body.
Let her be offered the best seat, not as compensation but as correction. Let her name be called not with reluctance but with restored recognition. Let her presence shift the atmosphere, not because she is a woman—but because she is right.—not as a political courtesy, but because the law is on her side, the people are on her side, and not even the President of the Republic can stop her from representing Kogi Central. That standing ovation should not just acknowledge her return—it should acknowledge their own failure to uphold the law from the beginning.
It would signal a new era of cooperation and respect, and set a positive tone for her return. The applause would be loud and clear, a testament to the Senate’s commitment to unity and moving forward.. And as she enters, dressed in her usual flowing white dress—a symbol of both peace and power—the chamber should offer her not just a seat, but the best seat. Let it be a gesture not of pity, but of overdue respect. Let her presence be restored with full recognition, not begrudging tolerance. It would signal a new era of cooperation and respect, and set a positive tone for her return. The applause would be loud and clear, a testament to the Senate’s commitment to unity and moving forward. It would signal a new era of cooperation and respect, and set a positive tone for her return. The applause would be loud and clear, a testament to the Senate’s commitment to unity and moving forward.
If You Don’t Open the Door, the Disgrace Will Be Yours
If the Senate leadership refuses to open the door for Senator Natasha, and she is forced to sit outside, the disgrace will not fall on her—it will fall squarely on the male-dominated Senate, on the Tinubu Presidency, and on Nigeria itself before the eyes of the world. It will be seen as an act of cowardice disguised as protocol, and as contempt for both democracy and womanhood.
The world is watching, and the image of a wrongfully suspended woman senator—legally reinstated, publicly supported, yet politically blocked—will become a lasting stain on Nigeria’s democratic fabric. It is therefore imperative that President Bola Tinubu and Attorney General Lateef Fagbemi make the call that matters. Not a public speech. Not a media interview. Just one cold, quiet, private phone call to Senate President Godswill Akpabio: Let her in. The law has spoken.
Conclusion: If They Lock the Door, She Should Still Show Up
If the Senate bars her entry, Senator Natasha should set up outside the National Assembly—because that is where the truth will sit.
And if she does, she will not be alone.
The Constitution will sit with her.
The court’s judgment will sit with her.
And history—our history—will watch who chose power over principle, and who chose to govern even when denied a seat.
Because if the Senate bars her entry…
She should sit outside.
And we all should take a hard look at who is really inside.
This writer does not know any of the individuals involved; the focus is solely on upholding democracy, truth, and justice.
