Court strikes out FG’s criminal charges against Senator Natasha

An Abuja High Court on Thursday struck out the criminal charges filed by the Federal Government against the senator representing Kogi Central, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, bringing to an end a legal case that generated widespread public debate.

Court documents showed that the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation filed a Notice of Discontinuance, leading the court to formally strike out the criminal defamation and related charges earlier instituted against the lawmaker.

The case arose from comments allegedly made by Akpoti-Uduaghan during a televised interview and attracted significant public attention, with debates centring on freedom of expression, political accountability and the scope of prosecutorial powers in a democracy.

The Notice of Discontinuance, dated December 12, 2025, terminated proceedings in suit number FHC/ABJ/CR/195/2025.

Delivering his ruling on Thursday, Justice C. N. Oji acknowledged the notice and accordingly struck out the charges.

In his remarks, the judge said the development highlighted the importance of exercising restraint in the use of prosecutorial authority.

“The court hopes that this decision will promote restraint, healing and respect for the rule of law within our democratic process,” he said.

Counsel to the Federal Government confirmed the withdrawal of the charges in open court, stating that the decision was taken in accordance with the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act.

“This step is taken in the overall interest of justice and to strengthen public confidence in the legal system,” the prosecution said.

Speaking after the court session, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan described the ruling as a vindication, reaffirming her commitment to democratic principles.

“The outcome today reinforces my faith in the rule of law. I remain committed to serving my constituents and defending the democratic rights of Nigerians,” she said, while expressing gratitude to her legal team and supporters.

The striking out of the case follows months of legal controversy and sustained public discourse, with several civil society and rights groups previously criticising the prosecution as an attempt to suppress free speech and political participation.