Does the Senate Have the Power to Unanimously Suspend a Member for an Unreasonable Period?

The recent suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has sparked intense debate about the limits of legislative power, representation, and the democratic rights of constituents. A fundamental question arises: Does the Senate have the authority to suspend a duly elected representative for six months, effectively silencing the voice of an entire constituency?

This issue transcends mere political maneuvering—it strikes at the heart of democracy. A senator does not represent themselves alone; they embody the collective will of the people who elected them. Suspending a senator for an extended period raises concerns about voter disenfranchisement and the denial of democratic privileges to an entire constituency.

With Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan sidelined for six months, a critical gap emerges: Who will advocate for her constituents in the Senate? For half a year, the people of Kogi Central will have no direct representation in legislative deliberations, budget allocations, or policy-making—an undeniable injustice to their democratic rights.

The Senate’s decision to suspend Akpoti-Uduaghan is not without legal implications. A crucial precedent exists in Ali Ndume v. Senate (2018), where the Court of Appeal ruled that the Senate lacked the authority to suspend a member beyond a reasonable period. The court emphasized that prolonged suspensions amount to a violation of constitutional rights and the disenfranchisement of constituents. If history is any guide, the current suspension may face a similar legal challenge.

One of the most troubling aspects of this saga is the conflict of interest in the process. The Senate President, whose office is at the center of the allegations, has neither recused himself nor allowed an independent investigation to take place. Instead, he presided over the proceedings—raising serious questions about due process, fairness, and impartiality.

If the Senate President remained in office without stepping aside for an independent probe, then there was no true investigation. This alone calls into question the legitimacy of the entire process. How can an accused person serve as judge, jury, and executioner in their own case?

The suspension of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is not just about her—it is about the integrity of Nigeria’s democracy. If elected representatives can be silenced at will, then the very foundation of representative governance is at risk. The Senate must tread carefully, ensuring that its actions do not set a dangerous precedent where political power overrides democratic principles.