Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, representing Kogi Central, has addressed recent public remarks by legal luminary Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) regarding her sexual harassment allegation against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
Agbakoba, a former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), had, in a letter dated April 14, 2025, demanded that Senator Natasha retract her allegations and provide evidence supporting her claim that Akpabio sexually harassed her on December 8, 2023.
In a response dated April 30, Natasha clarified that she had not received any correspondence from Agbakoba via post, courier, or personal delivery and rejected any notion of deliberate silence.
“I place it on formal record that no such letters have ever been served upon me. The imputation of recalcitrance is therefore inoperative,” she said.
She invoked the legal doctrine of lis pendens—which discourages public commentary on matters before the courts—as the basis for her initial silence. She noted that two related suits are ongoing: one filed by Akpabio’s wife at the FCT High Court seeking ₦250 billion in damages and another filed by Natasha at the Federal High Court, Abuja, challenging her suspension from the Senate.
“While Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025 is unrelated to the sexual harassment allegations, Suit No. CV/816/2025 is directly related to those allegations and was instituted by your client’s spouse,” she noted.
She criticized Agbakoba’s actions, describing them as improper and contradictory, accusing him of attempting to sway public opinion while invoking the sub judice rule to halt a Senate investigation into the matter.
“A litigant may not approbate in the courts and reprobate in the press,” she said.
Natasha further accused Akpabio of violating the principle of natural justice by presiding over his own case when she was suspended from the Senate for six months.
“Nemo judex in causa sua: no one ought to be judge in his own cause,” she said.
She dismissed claims that her prior cordial interactions with Akpabio undermined her allegations, asserting that “civility should not be mistaken for consent or comfort.”
“To do so trivialises a serious concern of sexual harassment, especially in a workplace where there is a dominant power dynamic,” she added.
Natasha contended that Agbakoba had no constitutional authority to demand evidence outside the scope of judicial proceedings.
“A private legal practitioner, however distinguished, is not vested with adjudicatory authority under the Constitution or any statute of the Federal Republic,” she wrote.
She reiterated her commitment to her February 28, 2025, complaint and court filings, urging Agbakoba to counsel his client on the implications of presiding over matters where he has a personal interest.
“This letter is issued solely to correct the public record and to prevent a constructive admission being inferred from silence,” she stated.
She concluded by requesting that all future correspondence be directed through her legal representatives.