Court Moves Senator Natasha’s Objection to Defamation Charges to Dec 1

In her trial for allegedly defaming Senate President Godswill Akpabio and former Kogi State governor Yahaya Bello, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan filed a preliminary objection. On Monday, Justice Chizoba Oji of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, located in Maitama, Abuja, scheduled a hearing for December 1.

On June 19, the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and the Minister of Justice charged Akpoti-Uduaghan with three counts that bordered on damaging imputation.

In the charge, designated FCT/HC/CR/297/25, Akpoti-Uduaghan was charged with making damaging accusations that she knew would damage Senator Akpabio’s image by alleging that he conspired with former governor Bello to murder her.

She is also charged with making a similar damaging accusation knowing that it would damage former governor Bello’s reputation.

The prosecution further charged the troubled senator with making another imputation, which she knew would damage Akpabio’s reputation by linking him to the demise of a certain Miss Imoren Iniobong.

But she entered a not guilty plea to the accusation against her.

David Kaswe, the prosecuting attorney, told the court during the case’s resumed hearing on Monday that although the defendant’s preliminary objection was scheduled to be heard, the prosecution was unable to deliver its response despite having filed it with the court.

Kaswe requested a brief delay so that the prosecution could properly serve the defendant with its response to her preliminary objection after informing the court that the address where the prosecution’s reply was served did not belong to any of the senator’s attorneys.

“It will not be fair for the prosecution to insist that the matter proceeds since the defense team has indicated that they will respond to our counter,” the prosecutor stated.

“We are requesting a brief postponement in order to allow us (the prosecution) to properly serve the defense.”

In response, Natasha’s lead attorney, Ehighioge West-Idahosa SAN, told the court that none of her defense team had received the prosecution’s response to her client’s preliminary objection and that they had not seen it.

None of the defendants’ attorneys received the prosecution’s rebuttal. We have not been served as the defendant. The senior lawyer informed the court, “We plan to re-serve when we are properly served because we have additional evidence to file.”

However, as members of the defense team intend to travel to Canada for this year’s International Bar Association gathering, he asked the court to allow a lengthy adjournment.

Justice Oji postponed the preliminary objection hearing until December 1 after hearing from the parties.

West-Idahosa informed the court during the case’s final September session on September 23 that the defendant had submitted a notice of preliminary objection, alleging that the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation had abused its prosecutorial powers.

The senior lawyer claimed that the preliminary objection challenged the charge’s legitimacy rather than its parts, stating that “this is the threshold of jurisdictional matter.”

He then told the court that the prosecution had not yet replied to the preliminary objection that the defense had given to the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation on September 18.