The trial of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan under the Cybercrime (Prohibition, Prevention, etc) Amendment Act 2024, at the Federal High Court, Abuja, which was expected to commence on Monday, September 22, 2025, could not proceed following a preliminary objection raised by her defence lawyers.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan was initially arraigned on June 30, 2025 on a six-count charge under the Cybercrimes Act and charged with alleged false and harmful statements against the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio and former governor of Kogi State, Alhaji Yahaya Bello.
When the charges were read to her, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan pleaded not guilty and was granted bail, thus the matter was fixed for September 22 for the prosecution to open its case.
At the commencement of proceedings on Monday, the prosecuting counsel, David Kaswe told the court that the prosecution was fully prepared, with its first witness present and a television screen mounted in the courtroom for evidence.
But, counsel to Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, Ehiogie West-Idahosa, SAN, raised an objection and said the court must first decide his client’s preliminary motion before any trial can commence.
West-Idahosa told the court that the objection was not about the substance of the charges, but about what he described as “abuse of prosecutorial powers” by the Attorney General of the Federation, stressing that the prosecution also failed to serve his client with the witness statements.
According to him; “The objection goes to the root of the case and must be determined before the prosecution can proceed”.
In his counter, the prosecuting counsel, Kaswe prayed the court not to allow the objection delay proceedings.
In his short ruling, Justice Mohammed Umar held that the defence motion must be considered first and accordingly adjourned the case to October 20, 2025, for hearing of the objection.
The Attorney General of the Federation, had filed charges that bothered on spreading false information capable of inciting violence and putting lives at risk against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, stating that while speaking at a gathering in Ihima, Okehi LGA of Kogi State, on April 4, 2025, the Senator representing Kogi Central claimed that Akpabio directed Bello to plot her assassination.
The charge sheet read; “That on or about the 1st day of April 2025, while addressing a crowd of people at Ihima Community, Kogi State, you—Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, intentionally caused the following communication to be transmitted via a computer system and network, to wit: ‘…and Akpabio told Yahaya Bello, I am saying, standing by what I have said. He told him that he should make sure that killing me does not happen in Abuja, it should be done here, so it will seem as if it is the people that killed me here…’ And you, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan knew this contained a threat that could harm the reputation of Senator Godswill Obot Akpabio, GCON, as the President of the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. You thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 24 (2) (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024 and punishable under the same Act.”
Count Two also states: “That on or about the 1st day of April 2025, while addressing a crowd of people at Ihima Community, Kogi State, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, you — Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan — intentionally caused the following communication to be transmitted via a computer system and network, to wit: ‘…and Akpabio told Yahaya Bello, I am saying, standing by what I have said. He told him that he should make sure that killing me does not happen in Abuja, it should be done here, so it will seem as if it is the people that killed me here…’ And you, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, knew this contained a threat that could harm the reputation of Yahaya Adoza Bello, a former Governor of Kogi State. You thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 24 (2) (c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024 and punishable under the same section of the Act,” the charge sheet read.
The case on Cybercrime Act before Justice Umar followed a petition by Akpabio to the Inspector-General of Police, alleging that Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan statements which he claimed damaged his reputation and endangered his life.
