Akpoti-Uduaghan Urges Supreme Court to Dismiss Akpabio’s Appeal, Calls It Abuse of Court Process
“Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan urges the Supreme Court to dismiss Senate President Godswill Akpabio’s appeal, describing it as an abuse of court process amid an ongoing Court of Appeal judgment.”
The legal battle between the President of the Senate, Senator Godswill Akpabio, and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has taken a new turn as the respondents have asked the Supreme Court of Nigeria to dismiss Akpabio’s application in its entirety, describing it as lacking merit and constituting an abuse of court process.
Court documents sighted in Abuja reveal that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan has filed a counter-affidavit opposing an appeal brought before the apex court by Senator Akpabio, which arose from proceedings at the Court of Appeal.
The counter-affidavit, deposed by a senior legislative aide to Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, was filed in response to Akpabio’s Motion on Notice dated January 21, 2026.
According to the respondents, the Court of Appeal had already concluded hearing in the substantive appeal on November 28, 2025, and reserved the matter for judgment. They argue that approaching the Supreme Court at this stage is a calculated attempt to interfere with an appellate process already awaiting final determination.
The respondents maintain that Senator Akpabio was given ample opportunity to present his case before the Court of Appeal in full compliance with the Rules of Court. They further insist that the brief of argument filed by Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan was procedurally compliant, properly before the court, and was never challenged during the proceedings.
At the heart of the dispute is an alleged breach of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2021, which limit briefs of argument to 35 pages. The respondents contend that while their legal teams complied with this requirement, Senator Akpabio’s brief exceeded the prescribed page limit and was never regularised within the time allowed by law.
As a result, they argue, the Court of Appeal rightly declined to admit the defective brief and proceeded to hear the appeal based on the valid processes before it.
On the substantive issues, the respondents submit that the grounds of appeal relied upon by the appellant raise issues of mixed law and fact, for which prior leave of court is mandatory. They insist that no such leave was sought or obtained, rendering the appeal incompetent ab initio.
The counter-affidavit also dismisses claims of denial of fair hearing, stating that adjournments are discretionary and that the Court of Appeal exercised its powers judicially and judiciously throughout the proceedings.
Urging the Supreme Court to dismiss the application, the respondents describe the appeal as a delaying tactic aimed at stalling the delivery of judgment by the Court of Appeal.
With the matter now before Nigeria’s highest court, legal analysts say the case could test key principles of appellate procedure, judicial discretion, and the limits of post-hearing interventions within the country’s judicial system.
