The Nasarawa State Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Aliyu Bello, has backed the Senate’s decision to suspend Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months, stating that the action follows legislative protocols and is not rooted in gender bias.
The Senate, on Thursday, upheld the recommendation of its Ethics Committee to suspend the Kogi Central lawmaker following her petition alleging sexual harassment by Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
The committee dismissed her claims on procedural grounds, asserting that her actions had brought ridicule to the upper chamber.
In an opinion piece titled “Akpabio, Natasha, and Senate: A Question of Rules, Not Gender,” Bello contended that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension was a matter of enforcing legislative order rather than an act of discrimination. He pointed to past instances where male senators faced similar disciplinary actions, including the 2018 suspension of Senator Ovie Omo-Agege (APC, Delta Central) for 90 days and the 2023 suspension of Senator Abdul Ningi (PDP, Bauchi Central) over budget padding allegations.
“The Nigerian Senate has a well-documented history of suspending members—male and female—who breach its rules,” Bello stated. “Why, then, should Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s case be framed differently?”
He further argued that equating her suspension with gender marginalization risked trivializing genuine struggles for equity. According to him, “The Senate’s disciplinary mechanisms are gender-blind, prioritizing institutional integrity over individual identity.”
Bello emphasized that in a Senate of 109 lawmakers, no member—including those from Akpoti-Uduaghan’s party—opposed the suspension. He maintained that enforcing parliamentary rules uniformly is key to maintaining order, urging advocates of gender equality to focus on systemic barriers rather than isolated cases.
The suspension of Akpoti-Uduaghan has ignited widespread debate, with critics accusing the Senate of targeting a female lawmaker. However, Bello’s stance aligns with the Senate’s argument that disciplinary actions must be applied without bias.
The controversy surrounding the case is expected to continue, as supporters of Akpoti-Uduaghan demand a review of the decision, while others insist that legislative discipline must be upheld.
