The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, on Monday, 27 October, 2025 asked a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT, sitting at Maitama, presided over by Justice Chizoba Orji to dismiss an objection the embattled Senator for Kogi Central, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, filed to challenge the defamation charge pending against her.
The AGF, in a counter-affidavit he filed before the court, stressed that the charge was a product of a comprehensive and conclusive investigations he said established a prima facie case against the lawmaker.
Denying the allegation that his office abused the court process, the AGF, in a counter-affidavit he filed before the court, equally faulted the defendant’s claim that her own petitions were not investigated.
The development came on a day the trial judge, Justice Orji, slated December 1 to hear the preliminary objection Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan filed to quash the three-count charge the Federal Government entered against her.
In the charge marked: CR/297/25, FG alleged that the defendant 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 Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan of making false imputation 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, FG 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 FG, the defendant, by her claim, committed an offence under 391 of the Penal Code, Cap 89, Laws of the Federation, 1990, and punishable under section 392 of the same law.
While justifying the charge, the AGF, in the fresh 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.
“The charge against the defendant is consistent with the extant laws and does not constitute an abuse of the legal and prosecutorial powers of the Office of the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation,” he added.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan, who had since pleaded not guilty to the three-count charge against her, challenged the jurisdiction of the court to go ahead with her trial.
She had through her team of lawyers led by Mr. Ehiogie West-Idahosa, SAN, urged the court halt the commencement of full-blown trial, pending the determination of the preliminary objection.
The defence lawyer told the court that the objection was premised on the fact that “there has been abuse of prosecutorial powers,” by the Attorney-General of the Federation, a situation he 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,” 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 front-loaded 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.
Meanwhile, at the resumed sitting on Monday, FG’s lawyer, Mr. David Kaswe, told the court that he was unable to serve the AGF’s counter-affidavit on the defendant.
He therefore, prayed for an adjournment to enable him to serve the process.
“It will not be fair for the prosecution to insist that the matter goes on as the defence team has indicated that they will respond to our counter.
“In the circumstance, we are asking for a short adjournment to enable us to effect proper service on the defence,” FG’s lawyer added.
Though he did not oppose the adjournment request, however, counsel to the defendant asked for a long date, stressing that members of his team were billed to attend the International Bar Association meeting in Canada.
After she had listened to both sides, Justice Orji adjourned to hear the objection.
Source : Vanguard online
