By Nathaniel Zacchaeus, Abuja
There was tension at the National Assembly yesterday when Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Diaspora and Nongovernmental Organisations, challenged the relocation of her seat in the red chamber without informing her.
Her action caused her to clash with Senate President Godswill Akpabio, who refused to listen to her because she failed to speak from the seat that had been newly allocated to her.
Tension started when Akpoti-Uduaghan, who represents the Kogi Central Senatorial District in the National Assembly, refused to accept the seat that had been reallocated to her.
She out rightly rejected the change in the sitting arrangement by not taking up another seat.
The Senate Chief Whip, Senator Mohammed Monguno, had cited sections of the Senate Standing Rules on a point of order to justify the reallocation of the seat and the allocation of another seat to her.
Monguno explained that the changes were necessary to accommodate changes caused by some opposition members moving to the majority party, the APC.
He said such changes fall within the constitutional prerogative of the Senate President.
Monguno further emphasised that failure to comply with the new seating arrangement could lead to penalties for “improper seating position.” including the possibility of being prevented from participating in Senate proceedings.
He noted that the reallocation was due to defections by opposition lawmakers, which had altered the sitting arrangement.
Quoting the Senate Standing Orders, Monguno stressed that any senator who refused to comply with a seat allocated would not be recognized or allowed to contribute to debates.
Senate Presenter Godswill Akpabio sustained Monguno’s point of order.
However, when Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan signified her intention to speak by raising her hand, Akpabio did not recognise her to talk because she was not sitting in her newly allocated seat.
Obviously angry by the Senate President’s position, Akpoti-Uduaghan raised her voice in protest and defiance of Akpabio’s refusal to recognise her.
She said, “I don’t care if I am silenced; I am not afraid. You have denied me my privilege.”
Her protests led to tension and a rowdy session in the Senate, forcing Akpabio to instruct the Sergeant-At-Arms to take charge and remove her from the seat in accordance with relevant sections of the Senate Standing Orders.
One of the Sergeant-At-Arms operatives moved and stood beside Akpoti-Uduaghan’s seat and asked her to vacate it, but she refused.
Some ranking senators and principal officers immediately intervened to prevent the situation from worsening.
They approached her to calm her down, but she appeared not to have been placated as she maintained her position.
After the chambers became calm, Akpabio explained that the development was caused by the ongoing renovation of the Senate and new sitting arrangements following the defection of some senators to other political parties.
Akpabio said, “When the chambers were renovated, one of the things I said was that I hope the renovation will not turn us into the South African Parliament, where you hear ‘Malema sit down,’ ‘Malema sit down,’ and that is because we know how the electronic system ought to work.”
He recalled a similar experience during his time in the 8th Senate, saying that he, too, had protested against his seat being changed, but he succeeded in resolving the issue without it becoming a public spectacle.
“I recall that in the 8th Senate, I had almost a similar issue, where seats were reallocated due to movement, and I also moved at that time.
“So when I entered the chambers, they gave me a different seat. I also voiced my anger and said, what is going on here?
“The Senate President was able to control the situation, so everything I said did not get out to the public, so,social media had nothing to feast on.
“So, unfortunately, we need to go back to our old microphone system so that people will not speak out of order, and they’ll not speak when they are not recognized. So I apologise on behalf of the contractor for the issue.”
As the plenary session progressed, other senators from Kogi State intervened in the controversy.
Senator Isah Jibrin (APC, Kogi East) specifically said Akpoti-Uduaghan did not handle her seat change appropriately.
He, therefore, apologised on her behalf to the Senate, saying the Kogi caucus would counsel her.
His colleague from Kogi West, Senator Sunday Karimi, who heads the Committee on Senate Services and is responsible for allocating seats, said the Akpoti-Uduaghan action was not proper.
He said, “Even as Chairman of the Senate Services Committee, you don’t need to tell me before you change seats.
“Senator Ekong Sampson told me he wanted a seat that had been taken, but before you knew it, Senator Natasha shouted my name.
“When she came in, we extended an arm of friendship to her; in fact, we loved her too much. I don’t know why this place will be turned upside down like that. I want to add that she should come out and apologise to us for her behaviour this morning.”
He said he barely managed to contain her anger by not replying to Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan when she rained personal insult on him.
“I don’t know how to fight a woman. That is why I controlled my temper following her insults. Today, my name will be on social media for the wrong reasons.”
In his response, Akpabio acknowledged Karimi’s frustration and sought to de-escalate the tension.
Akpabio said, “Senator Karimi, I see you are very hurt. I want to appeal to you to temper justice with mercy.
“We are not going to resolve into a committee of whole or refer the issue to the Committee on Ethics and code of conduct and public petitions. The matter would be dealt with at the appropriate time.
“I just want to say that anybody who is prepared to make law must be prepared to obey the law.”
*Upper Chamber berates Benue Assembly over suspension of CJ, suspension of opposition members
The Senate yesterday described as unacceptable the decision of the Benue State House to remove Justice Maurice Ikpambese as the state’s chief judge.
The red chamber said the Benue lawmakers acted “without having recourse to the tenets of the law.”
The upper chamber then mandated its Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters to monitor compliance with the directive already issued by the National Judicial Council directing the reinstatement of the CJ.
The resolutions of the red chamber followed its consideration and adoption of a motion titled: “Looming constitutional crises in Benue State stemming from purported removal of Chief Judge of Benue State: Urgent need for Senate Intervention.”
The motion was sponsored by Senator Abba Moro and co-sponsored by Senators Emmanuel Udende and Titus Zam.
Moro, in his lead debate, said the Senate has noted that the National Assembly, amongst other things, has the responsibility as the highest law-making body in Nigeria to protect and preserve the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria to ensure compliance and prevent violations, “ensuring that the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land.”
He stated that there is a looming constitutional crisis in Benue state that, if not nipped in the bud, may spring to become a great threat to democracy and the rule of the entire country.”
He said, “The crisis stems from the purported removal of Justice Maurice Ikpambese, the Chief Judge of Benue State, by the State House of Assembly without recourse to the tenets of the law.”
He noted that the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) states “explicitly in Sections 153 and 271 that the National Judicial Council (NJC) is the only body that authorizes the appointment and removal of State Chief Judges and the constitution in the said sections go further to state the procedures for appointment and removal of State Chief Judges and anything outside the provisions of the Constitution is a direct affront to the Constitution and a danger to our democracy.”
He said that Section 292 (1) (a) of the Constitution expressly provides “for the step-by-step procedure for the removal of State Chief Judges.
“However, the Benue State House of Assembly was either ignorance of what the law says or with the intention to make a caricature of our ground norm.
“The Constitution went ahead to sit and pass a resolution just by themselves purporting to have removed the Chief Judge of Benue State, a resolution that brings a great insult to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), and if not reversed may lead to abuse of the powerful document that provides for the entire country.”
Senators Udende and Zam supported the motion and called for urgent measures to preserve democracy in Benue State.
