Natasha again rejects Agbakoba’s latest gambit after he first flew the kite about 2 weeks ago
By Jeph Ajobaju, Chief Copy Editor
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan (PDP, Kogi Central) has against scoffed at the latest gambit by Olisa Agbakoba SAN, to broker an out-of-court settlement between her and Senate President Godswill Akpabio whom she alleged sexually harassed her at least three times in two separate years in 2023 and 2024.
Agbakoba first flew the kite verbally about two weeks ago when he addressed a media conference in his office in Apapa, Lagos where he announced that Akpabio has engaged him as his lawyer in the case, and spoke on the alleged one harassment incident in Uyo in 2023 but left out the two other incidents in Abuja in 2024.
These incidents are contained in the petition Natasha filed in the Senate on March 5 before she was suspended for six months the following day at a plenary chaired by Akpabio, where she was not given the opportunity to defend her claims.
An out-of-court settlement is usually a legal tactic – espcially in Nigeria – to pay off one party to a dispute, bury the truth, and save the face of the one who pays; or save the face of the initiator of the settlement even if it does not involve financial payment.
Natasha scoffed at the first verbal suggestion of an out-of-court settlement of the case, insisting in a media interview on pursuing the case to its local conclusion court.
In a reply to a letter Agbakoba forward to her dated April 30, Natasha asserted that her petition of sexual harassment represents the truth of the events complained about, adding she would reserve further comments for the court, which has the exclusive preserve to exercise judgement on the propriety or otherwise of the matter.
Natasha faulted Agbakoba for calling on her to substantiate the allegations against Akpabio outside the pleadings already before the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court in Abuja on the same complaint by Akpabio’s wife Ekaette in suit No. CV/816/25.
“The assessment of evidence belongs to the courts alone. The nature of your demand for evidence in this manner, at the instance of your client, simply indicates a broader misconception of what truly amounts to sexual harassment as prescribed in several global protocols,” she argued in her reply to Agbakoba.
“It underscores a narrow perspective of the nature of this global menace. It is in my respectful opinion that this is another attempt by your client to play to the gallery and relegate this matter yet again to the backwaters.
“Should further particulars be required, they will be furnished in the ordinary course of disclosure, subject to the direction of the Honourable Courts. Any attempt to circumvent that regulated process risks subverting the very rule-of-law values you have championed throughout your distinguished career.”
Natasha said she firmly believes Akpabio now mounts a media campaign through Agbakoba demanding proof, a domain Akpabio would not allow to be addressed by the Senate due to his privileged position.
“The principle is elementary: a litigant may not approbate in the courts and reprobate in the press. The rule against parallel adjudication safeguards the integrity of judicial determination, preserves the fairness of proceedings, and secures the dignity of all arms of government.”
On a social media post of 9 December 2023 in which she acknowledged Akpabio[s presence at a public event – which Agbakoba has referenced – and photographs taken at the Inter-Parliamentary Union Session in Geneva (March 24-25, 2024) showing the customary civil interactions that associate with official representation, Natasha argued that outward civility cannot be transmuted into an admission that no misconduct occurred, saying to do so trivialises a serious concern of sexual harassment, especially in a workplace using a dominant position.
She said she observed a studious restraint, acting upon legal advice and out of deference to the doctrine of lis pendens in refusing to respond to the purported letters written to her by Agbakoba on the sexual harassment allegation levelled against Akpabio.
The letter also explained that she did not receive any previous letter from Agbakoba.
She wrote: “Two parallel suits, one initiated by the spouse of the Senate President, the other initiated by me, are pending before courts of competent jurisdiction: Suit No. CV/816/25 (Unoma Godswill Akpabio v. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, High Court of the FCT) in which ₦250 billion damages and injunctive reliefs are sought on allegations of defamation and sexual harassment; and Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025 (Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan v. Clerk of the National Assembly & Ors, Federal High Court, Abuja) challenging, inter alia, my referral to the committee on ethics, privileges and public petitions on grounds of misconduct without affording me a fair hearing culminating into my purported suspension from the Senate for a period of 6 months, the cognate withdrawal of my remuneration, security detail and parliamentary privileges.
“While Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/384/2025 is unrelated to the sexual harassment allegations I made against the President of the Senate, Suit No. CV/816/2025 is directly related to the allegations of sexual harassment instituted by your client’s spouse, on which issues have been joined.
“In fidelity to the doctrine of lis pendens and a court’s direction, my silence was occasioned. Given that both suits are currently before courts of competent jurisdiction, it is improper for any party to make extrajudicial comments.”
Agbakoba said he had written a second letter to Natasha demanding a retraction of her “clearly false and unsubstantiated” sexual harassment allegations against Akpabio.
He disclosed at a press conference in Lagos on Tuesday that the latest letter became necessary because Natasha had failed to clarify the significant contradictions in her allegations against Akpabio, as demanded in his first letter dated 14 April 2025.
He said instead of clarifying the contradictions in her allegation that Akpabio sexually harassed her on 8 December 2023 and her exaltation of her alleged harasser on her social media accounts on 9 December 2023, Natasha deleted her social media post.
In a letter Agbakoba signed for Olisa Agbakoba Legal (AOL), dated 22 April 2025, and made available to journalists, he said: “Recall that in our first letter to you, dated April 14, 2025, we requested that you clarify contradictions in your sexual harassment allegation against our client, Senator Godswill Akpabio. Of note is the contradiction as to timeline and dates.
“You have failed to clarify your sexual harassment allegation on December 8, 2023 and your exaltation of Senator Akpabio on your social media accounts (Instagram and X/Twitter) on December 9, 2023 – the day after you alleged he sexually harassed you.
“Rather than clarify this contradiction, you deleted the social media post, which to us is extremely concerning.”
Legal scholar Jaja warns Agbakoba against “reputational damage” in defending Akpabio in “touring press conferences”
Legal scholar Tonye Jaja on Wednesday cautioned Agbakoba against reputational damage in his public interventions in the sexual harassment allegation Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan levelled against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
Jaja in an open letter to Agbakoba dated April 30 accused the former Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) President of indulging in public posturing while risking serious legal and reputational consequences for himself and his client.
Jaja, who trained under Chinonye Obiagwu SAN, and now practises in Lesotho, anchored his argument on three foundational legal principles: double jeopardy, sub judice, and clean hands.
He reminded Agbakoba that the matter has already been dismissed by the Senate Committee on Ethics, chaired by a legal professional, with representation from other Senior Advocates, including Monday Ubani.
Any further push to reopen the matter, he warned, could constitute a constitutional violation of Natasha’s right not to be subjected to trial twice for the same issue.
Jaja questioned why a respected lawyer like Agbakoba is “touring press conferences” rather than limiting his arguments to courtrooms where multiple suits on the matter are active.
“Your interventions should be before a competent court, not in public opinion campaigns,” Jaja wrote, referencing a lawsuit filed by Akpabio’s wife Ekaette seeking over N300 billion in damages from Natasha for accusing her husband of sexual harassment.
He also called out what he described as hypocrisy in Akpabio’s pursuit of justice through his lawyers while allegedly denying the same justice to others in his role as Chairman of the National Assembly’s Governing Council of the Institute for Legislative Studies.
“Your client seeks equity yet fails to deliver it,” Jaja wrote, questioning the moral basis of Agbakoba’s mission to clean up Akpabio’s public image.
He described Akpabio’s six-month suspension of Natasha as legally and morally defective, saying it violates Senate Standing Orders which limit such suspensions to a maximum of 14 days.
Jaja also challenged Agbakoba’s conciliatory approach, insisting that true reconciliation must start with Akpabio righting that procedural wrong.
He quoted Martin Luther King Jr. saying, “the arc of the moral universe bends toward justice” and urged Agbakoba not to allow pride or professional ambition to blind him to the risks involved in the case.
He warned that even the most seasoned advocates are not immune to reputational damage when they abandon caution and objectivity in pursuit of politically charged missions.
Read also:
