No Court vacated order restraining Senate from trying Natasha Uduaghan – Group

A pressure group, Action Collective has asked Nigerians to disregard speculation making the rounds regarding a non-existing order vacating the earlier order against the Senate in the ongoing case involving Senator Natasha Uduaghan.

The group said a Federal High Court in Abuja Abuja had rather clarified that it never vacated its earlier order restraining the Senate from subjecting Senator Natasha Uduaghan to investigation over the alleged sexual harassment against the Senate President Goodwill Akpabio.

The group said the court did not consider the Plaintiff’s application for mandatory injunction invoking its disciplinary jurisdiction but prioritised the motion of the Senate which was only filed on Monday the 17th day of March, 2025.

A Kogi based group while debunking the rumour through a statement Thursday in Abuja, said that order was subsisting.

A section of the media had erroneously reported that the restraining order against the Senate Committee on Ethics had been vacated.

The group said while the Senate, inspite of the restraining order, went ahead to sit and tried Natasha leading to the pronouncement of her six months suspension.

“They equally filed an application which was vehemently opposed by the Plaintiff’s counsel, Michael Numa SAN, who emphasized the contemptuous actions of the Senate in defying the Court’s orders.

“Numa argued that the Senate was not entitled to any further orders from the same Court it had disrespected.

“After standing down the matter for a few hours the Judge
returned to deliver a ruling, offering clarification on the scope of Order 4. And contrary to the interpretation sought by the 2nd Defendant (Senate) that the order (restraining order)was meant to halt the entire legislative function of the Senate, the Court noted that from the material before it that the National Assembly has been carrying out its legislative functions without an hindrance.

“The Court went further to clarify that owing to the varying interpretations of the order, it will set aside the consequential aspects of Order
4 which was simply meant to give effect to the predicate orders.”

The group declared that contrary to false reports circulating,”the Court did not set aside Orders 1, 2, or 3, which included orders restraining the Senate’s Ethics Committee from continuing with its investigation into the Plaintiff’s alleged conduct while the Motion for a Interlocutory injunction remained pending.

“Additionally, the Court did not reverse its directive for the Defendants to show cause within 72 hours or overturn the order to maintain the status quo ante bellum.

“The Court’s
decision only involved the clarification of Order 4, due to the differing interpretations of it by the Defendants.

“The matter was subsequently adjourned to March 25, 2025, for the hearing of all pending applications including the substantive dispute.

“We use this medium to assure the general public that justice shall prevail even as we ask the general public to disregard the misinfornation in circulation,” the Kogi group clarified.