Senate President Godswill Akpabio has moved to correct what he describes as misleading information circulating about his N200 billion defamation lawsuit against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, insisting the case was filed over three months ago and is not a fresh legal action as recently claimed.
Through his media aide, Jackson Udom, Akpabio issued a detailed statement on Saturday titled “Setting the Record Straight on the Defamation Case Involving Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan,” directly addressing social media posts made by the Kogi Central senator on December 5, 2025. The Senate President accused Akpoti-Uduaghan of deliberately misrepresenting the timeline of the lawsuit to create a false narrative.
The clarification comes after widespread reports suggested Akpabio had just filed the massive defamation suit against his colleague. However, according to the statement from his office, the legal action was initiated more than three months prior, with delays attributed to routine administrative processes and standard judicial procedures rather than recent filing.
Central to the Senate President’s explanation is the issue of service of court documents. The statement revealed that the court’s bailiff made multiple attempts to personally serve Akpoti-Uduaghan with the originating processes, but each attempt was unsuccessful. An affidavit filed in the matter alleges that the senator deliberately evaded service, prompting the court to grant an application for substituted service in November.
Akpabio’s statement emphasized the principle that legal disputes should be resolved through proper judicial channels rather than public opinion or social media platforms. The Senate President challenged Akpoti-Uduaghan to present whatever evidence she claims to possess before a competent court of law, rather than making allegations on social media without supporting documentation.
The statement accused the Kogi senator of engaging in a pattern of behavior aimed at undermining lawful legal processes. It referenced her six-month suspension from the Senate as an example of previous instances where she allegedly attempted to delegitimize established procedures. The suspension, which was not detailed in the statement, appears to factor into the broader context of tensions between the two lawmakers.
Akpabio’s office stressed that judicial processes are governed by proof, procedure, and due process, not by emotional appeals or what it termed “social-media theatrics.” The statement suggested that Akpoti-Uduaghan’s December 5 social media posts were part of an attempt to shape public perception outside the courtroom rather than addressing the substantive legal issues at stake.
The defamation suit itself reportedly stems from allegations made by Akpoti-Uduaghan, though the specific statements that form the basis of the N200 billion claim were not detailed in Saturday’s clarification. The statement noted that these allegations have never been supported by evidence before the Senate Committee or any competent authority, suggesting the claims may have been made in the context of Senate proceedings or investigations.
The Senate President’s media aide concluded by stating that the public, media, and legal community now await Akpoti-Uduaghan’s formal defense to the defamatory claims in court. This suggests the case is progressing through the judicial system following the November approval of substituted service, which allows court documents to be served through alternative means when personal service proves impossible.
