Senate Ethics Committee Declares Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan's Harassment Case Closed

Senate Committee Draws the Line: Case Against Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan Officially Closed

Let me break it down for you. The Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, headed by Neda Imaseun, has made it crystal clear: the sexual harassment case involving Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is now officially off the table within the upper chamber of the National Assembly. This decision comes after a series of heated exchanges and legal back-and-forth that have captured national attention.

Now, here’s the kicker: this announcement was made on a Tuesday, and it wasn’t exactly what Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal team had hoped for. Her counsel, Abiola Akiode, had been vocal about perceived bias in how Imaseun handled the case. But Imaseun didn’t mince words, declaring the matter closed and emphasizing that no further action would be taken at the Senate level.

Naija News has been keeping a close eye on this story, and the message from Imaseun is loud and clear: the case is over as far as the Senate is concerned. This is a decision that’s been met with mixed reactions, sparking debates about fairness, bias, and the role of the Senate in such sensitive matters.

Read also:

Jonathan Lemires Net Worth In 2024 A Closer Look At His Wealth And Career

Akiode Calls for Imaseun’s Resignation Amid Claims of Bias

Earlier in the proceedings, Akiode, representing Akpoti-Uduaghan, had made a bold move by urging Imaseun to step down from his role as chairman of the Senate committee. His argument? Alleged bias in the handling of the case. Akiode didn’t hold back, arguing that stepping aside would ensure fairness and justice, aligning with the country’s constitution.

Here’s what Akiode had to say: “Our intention is that, if we are going to proceed, we want the chair to please step down from this conversation to allow for fairness and justice in accordance with the constitution of this country.” It’s a strong statement that reflects the gravity of the situation and the high stakes involved.

Imaseun Fires Back: The Case Is Before the Courts

Imaseun wasn’t about to back down. In his response, he made it clear that the case is already in the hands of the court system, and the Senate committee has no intention of meddling further. He laid out the facts as he sees them, pointing out procedural issues with the initial petition filed by Akpoti-Uduaghan.

Imaseun explained: “Let me tell you, the first petition that came before us was signed by Distinguished Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. Contrary to our rules, you cannot sign your own petition. The petition that came before us did not even have an address. Contrary to our rules, that petition shouldn’t have been entertained.”

He didn’t stop there. Imaseun went on to argue that the entire Senate had been privy to the events in question, making it nearly impossible to find an unbiased ad-hoc committee. “In any case, for the position that I can see you are taking, it means the whole senate is biased. Because the whole senate witnessed what happened. So, I don’t know what ad-hoc committee you are going to constitute that is not aware of what has been going on.”

Senate Rules Take Center Stage

Imaseun leaned heavily on the Senate’s rule book to justify his stance. He cited Order 40 (7), which explicitly states that the Senate should not deliberate on matters that are already pending in a court of law. “Learned respondent (Akpabio’s counsel) has just told us that this matter is before the law court, and I will address that by our rule book. I will address that by our rule book, order 40 (7), which says ‘senate should not receive or deliberate on any matter to which actions are pending in any court of law’. This is our rule book.”

Read also:

Barbara Sinatras Net Worth 2024 A Closer Look At Her Incredible Journey

With that, Imaseun concluded his argument, asserting that the Senate would defer to the court system to handle the matter fairly. “Therefore, the petitioner said he would not speak to his petition because the committee is biased, the respondent has just told us that this case is before a competent court of law, therefore, this committee will allow the court of law, that will not be biased, to handle this matter.”

And there you have it. The Senate Ethics Committee has drawn the line, declaring the matter closed within its chambers. “Therefore, this matter is closed here at the senate and it is adjourned sine die.” It’s a decision that’s sure to spark more discussions and debates as the legal process unfolds in the courts.