Ireti Kingibe Raises Questions Over Report Behind Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s Senate Suspension

A fresh controversy has emerged within Nigeria’s Senate after Federal Capital Territory lawmaker, Ireti Kingibe, revealed that she had not seen the report reportedly used as the basis for the suspension of Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the senator representing Kogi Central.

Kingibe made the revelation during an interview on Arise TV’s Prime Time programme, where she explained that her absence from the final stage of the committee process meant she did not review the document before the Senate’s decision was reached.

According to her, she attended a meeting of the Senate Committee on Petitions and Public Complaints and signed the attendance register, but later left to participate in a tax reform retreat involving lawmakers, including Adams Oshiomhole.

She explained that she considered the tax reform discussions more important at the time because of their wider impact on citizens and her constituents.

“I never saw the report that led to Natasha’s suspension,” Kingibe stated during the interview.

The senator said she only became aware of the report after the matter had progressed and later expressed her concerns to other lawmakers, including Enyinnaya Abaribe.

Kingibe added that despite raising the issue, she still had not been able to access or review the document that informed the disciplinary action.

Background to the Senate Dispute

The suspension of Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has generated public debate, with questions raised by observers about legislative procedures, committee processes, and transparency within Nigeria’s upper chamber.

Senate disciplinary actions typically involve committee reviews, presentations of findings, and consideration by lawmakers before a final decision is taken. However, Kingibe’s comments have introduced new concerns about whether all members expected to participate had access to the relevant materials before the decision.

Why Kingibe’s Statement Matters

The development has shifted attention from only the suspension itself to the internal processes behind the decision.

For lawmakers, access to committee reports is a key part of informed participation in legislative decisions. Any disagreement over whether members reviewed important documents could fuel further discussions about accountability and procedure.

What Happens Next?

The controversy may lead to further calls for clarification regarding the committee report, its circulation among senators, and the events that led to the suspension.

As public interest continues, attention will remain on possible statements from Senate leadership, committee members, and Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan regarding the matter.