The Senator representing Delta North, Prince Ned Nwoko, yesterday decried what he called the emotional manipulation and misrepresentation of facts trailing the six-month suspension slammed on Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
Nwoko, in a statement expressed concern that the issue has been “twisted into a false narrative of victimization and suppression.”
“Let it be clear: what was before the Senate was not her petition—something she herself has confirmed—but her conduct on the Senate floor, which violated the decorum expected of lawmakers,” he said and asked critics to “separate facts from sensationalism and resist the growing trend of exploiting gender sentiments to mask disorderly conduct within the Senate.”
He said that contrary to the insinuation in some quarters, the whole saga resulted from the reallocation of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan to a new seat.
He said: “The issue started with a simple matter—seat reallocation. This is a normal and longstanding practice in the Senate. I have personally been moved three times.
Here’s how it works:
“Whenever a senator leaves for any reason—whether due to death, defection, or other circumstances—there is an adjustment in the seating arrangement. This happens across both party lines, and it is not targeted at any individual. The idea is to ensure that seats are properly arranged based on seniority, party balance, and Senate rules.
“For instance, a ranking senator sits in the front row. If that senator leaves, a new member cannot just take that seat. Instead, everyone shifts accordingly. It is a process where multiple senators move to achieve the right balance.
“Everybody moves. Not just one person. The movement is done in a way that maintains the structure of the Senate. A fresher does not just sit where a senior senator was. The arrangement is reshuffled in a way that ensures order and respects seniority.
“This is a routine adjustment that happens all the time. It is not a new practice. It is not targeted at any one person. It is simply how the Senate works.
“Senator Natasha Refused to Move and Caused a Disruption”
“On that day, Senator Natasha was asked to move to a new seat. Instead of complying, she refused. That, in itself, was already an issue because every other senator understands that seating changes happen regularly.“But what followed was even more concerning. She became uncontrollable, raising her voice, shouting, “I am not scared of you!” We all saw the video. That display was completely uncalled for.
“At that moment, it was no longer about a seat—it was about discipline, order, and respect for the institution. If every senator decided to resist a simple procedural adjustment in that manner, the Senate would be ungovernable.
“The Senate Followed Due Process”
“After that incident, the Senate Committee on Ethics invited her for a disciplinary hearing. That is the proper procedure. The committee heard from those who were present that day, and all agreed that she had acted in an unruly manner. The report that was submitted was clear—her conduct on the floor was unacceptable, and she should be suspended.
“ I personally reached out to her during this process. I sent her messages because, as a lawyer, I know that before any judgment is passed, a person must be given an opportunity to state their case.
“ I asked her: “Are you prepared to apologize so that I can speak on your behalf? Ask that you be given the opportunity to apologize.”
“She responded that she did no wrong.
“That didn’t stop me. I told her directly: You are wrong. I watched the video. I saw what happened. The report before us was not about any sexual harassment claim—it was strictly about her disorderly conduct.
Misogyny Is Not the Issue — Disorderly Conduct Is
“Some voices are trying to frame this as an attack on women in politics. That is a manipulation of the truth. Nigeria has many strong female leaders who have made their mark through discipline, strategic engagement, and respect for institutional processes. The Senate is not and has never been against women.
“However, no lawmaker — man or woman — is above the rules of the chamber. The issue here is not gender; it is the expectation that all Senators must conduct themselves with decorum and respect for the institution they serve. The rules of engagement apply equally to all members, and when a Senator repeatedly flouts those rules, there must be consequences.
“The Allegations of Sexual Harassment Were Never Before the Senate”
“ One thing that must be made clear is that the Senate did not deliberate on any sexual harassment allegations. That matter is before the courts, and the courts will decide.
“It is highly unlikely that she will win such a case, because the alleged incident supposedly happened over a year ago. She had multiple opportunities to report it to the Senate, the police, or any authority, yet she did not.
“Even after this alleged incident, she traveled multiple times with the Senate President for international events, well-documented online. She was in the same spaces as him, attended meetings with him, and was often with her husband during these trips.
“To now come forward and narrow these allegations to a particular day, a particular time—when her husband was within range, when other people were present, when the Senate President’s wife was in the family house—raises serious questions. It is highly unlikely that such discussions would take place in such a setting.
The Senate Must Uphold Discipline and Order
“The Senate is not a chaotic town hall where emotions dictate decisions. There are clear procedures for addressing grievances, presenting petitions, and debating national issues. Senator Natasha was not sanctioned for submitting a petition—she was sanctioned for her behavior on the Senate floor.
“If we allow sentiments to override discipline, the Senate will become ungovernable. This is not about suppressing opposition or silencing voices; it is about maintaining the dignity of the institution and ensuring that every member adheres to the same standards of conduct.
“Exploiting Feminine Sentiments for Political Gain”
“It is disingenuous to claim that this is a case of gender-based suppression when the facts point to a different reality. The real danger is allowing the rules to be bent simply because a particular lawmaker chooses to play the victim card when confronted with the consequences of their actions.
“Leadership comes with responsibility. Every Senator, regardless of gender, must conduct themselves in a manner that upholds the integrity of the Red Chamber. If we start excusing unruly behavior because of gender, then we are setting a dangerous precedent where rules become optional based on emotional appeal.
“The Role of Her Husband in This Escalation”
“I was also deeply disappointed by the reaction of her husband. I had expected him to find a way to de-escalate the matter, to prevent it from becoming a full-blown crisis.
“When he sent me his statement and reaction, I told him exactly how I felt. If my wife were in such a situation, I would do everything possible to resolve the issue privately, to manage it in a way that does not cause further division.
“It is even more surprising because her husband has been friends with the Senate President long before he married Natasha. This could have been settled without this level of unnecessary public drama.
“The Senate must not bow to emotional blackmail or social media outrage fueled by half-truths. Nigeria’s democracy thrives when its institutions are strong, disciplined, and governed by rules—not when they are manipulated to serve personal or partisan interests.
“We must ensure that the principles of accountability, order, and respect remain the guiding forces of our legislative process. This is not about silencing anyone; it is about ensuring that the Senate remains a place of reasoned debate, not theatrical disruptions.”
