Following an application by the Federal Government, an Abuja High Court sitting at Maitama, on Monday, shifted further proceedings in the defamation charge it filed against the Senator for Kogi Central, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, till February 23, 2026.
Justice Chizoba Orji adjourned the case on the strength of a letter from the office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice.
When the matter was called, counsel to the embattled lawmaker, Ehiogie West Idahosa, SAN, after announcing his appearance, drew the attention of the court to the absence of the prosecution.
He urged the court to proceed with hearing a preliminary objection his client filed to challenge the competence of the charge against her.
However, Justice Orji disclosed that the court was in receipt of a letter from the office of the AGF, requesting that the case be deferred till next year.
The defence lawyer’s insistence that the case should go on since he was not served with a copy of the letter was waved aside by the court which said it was minded to adjourn the matter in the interest of justice.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, who is facing a three-count charge, was accompanied to the court by her husband.
The federal government had in the charge marked CR/297/25, alleged that the lawmaker who was earlier handed a six-month suspension by the Senate, made false and defamatory remarks when she appeared as a guest on a live television programme.
It specifically accused her of making false imputations that tarnished the image of both the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio and a former Governor of Kogi State, Yahaya Bello.
Providing the particulars of the offence in count one of the charge, the federal government told the court that the defendant committed the alleged crime on April 3, during a live broadcast on Channels Television’s Politics Today, when she alleged that some politicians, including Akpabio and Bello, were plotting to assassinate her.
According to the federal government, the defendant, by her claim, committed an offence under 391 of the Penal Code, Cap 89, Laws of the Federation, 1990, and is punishable under section 392 of the same law.
While justifying the charge, the AGF, in the process he filed before the court, stated: “The three-count charge was preferred against the defendant pursuant to the Penal code Law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and in the bonafide exercise of the prosecutorial powers of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999(as amended) and in the best interest of justice.
“The actions and conducts of the defendant/applicant (Natasha) contravened the penal code law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“The criminal charge against the defendant is borne out of the comprehensive and conclusive investigation of the case, including all petitions and parties related to the case by the Nigerian Police Force.
“All the petitions filed by the defendant were duly investigated and charges filed at the FCT High Court against her colleague senator.
“The Office of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation filed the criminal charge against the defendant after due regard to the public interest, the interest of justice and the need to prevent abuse of legal process.”
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, who had since pleaded not guilty to the charge, challenged the jurisdiction of the court to go ahead with her trial.
She urged the court to halt the commencement of trial, pending the determination of the preliminary objection.
Her objection was premised on the fact that “there has been abuse of prosecutorial powers” by the Attorney-General of the Federation, a situation she said stripped the court of its jurisdiction to entertain the charge as constituted.
“This is not a challenge to the counts or elements of the offence, but a challenge to the validity of the action itself.
“Assuming the court agrees with us, there will be no need to proceed with the trial.
“This is a threshold matter,” her lawyer, Idahosa, SAN, insisted, adding that the proof of evidence the prosecution served on the defendant did not contain full extra-judicial statements of the proposed witnesses.
“What was frontloaded were mere summaries. We want to know what each person said. We are entitled to full disclosure as part of the facilities we are entitled to be provided with to prepare our defence,” Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s lawyer further submitted.
The post Court Adjourns Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan Defamation Case To February 2026 At AGF’s Request appeared first on TheNigeriaLawyer.