Connect with us

News

Cover Story: Natasha’s Recall Process—Is It Realizable or Political Vendetta?

Published

on

 

Following the issue of recall that surfaced recently in Kogi Central regarding Senator Natasha, NIGERIAN TRACKER’s Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa takes a look at the scenario and files this story for Nigerian Tracker this weekend.

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

On the 20th of February, 2025, an altercation occurred between Senator Natasha and the President of the Chamber, Senator Akpabio. What birthed the altercation was the directive from the President of the Senate, Senator Godswill Akpabio, which demanded that Senator Natasha relocate to a newly allocated seat given to her due to a circumstance of the house.

The circumstance, which the Chief Whip of the house, Senator Muhammed Tahir Munguno of Borno State, in the midst of the rancor, stood up and read the rules guiding the conduct of the house in respect to the directive of the Senate President. According to the rules of the house as read by the Chief Whip, it is at the discretion of the President of the Senate to allocate seats to each senator. Also, according to the rules, a senator must only speak from the seat allocated to them. These are contained in Order 6, Rule 2 of their constitution.

Furthermore, the Chief Whip, in the course of reading out the rules of the house, gave a reason why the senator from Kogi Central, Senator Natasha, was instructed to change her seat. He revealed that two senators from the opposition parties—Senator Ned Nwokwo and Senator Francis Ezenwa—both from the Peoples Democratic Party and Labour Party, respectively, defected to the ruling All Progressive Congress. Hence, the need for a change of seats according to the arrangements of the members of the Senate.

It was after the refusal of Senator Natasha to heed the spelled-out rules that the President of the Senate ordered her dismissal from the house. Even with the order, the embattled senator insisted that she must make a contribution to the debate of an issue that was ongoing in the house at the moment, but the President persisted that she must make her contributions from the new seat allocated to her, else she would not be recognized. The two parties did not reconcile, and this led to Senator Natasha being led out of the house by the Sergeant-at-Arms.

Additionally, on the 28th of that same month, February 2025, Senator Natasha granted an interview on the Arise TV channel where she alleged that the President of the Senate was persecuting her because she refused him sex. The allegation sparked lots of debates as to the authenticity of her claim because, while the accused Senate President had been censured for this same act by one Joy Nunieh—the former NDDC Boss—in 2020 when the former was the Minister for Niger Delta Affairs, Senator Natasha had also made such allegations against different personalities in the country which were proven false—notably that of Reno Omokri.

In response to the above allegation, the wife of the Senate President, Ekaette Akpabio, during a press address at their residence, dismissed the allegation, citing that her responsible husband is incapable of making such sexual advances. The Senate President himself, through his aide, denied the allegation.

Moreover, on the 5th of March, 2025, Senator Natasha submitted a petition to the Ethics Committee of the Red Chamber of the National Assembly, notifying the committee officially of the sexual harassment, abuse of office, and other crimes committed against her by the President of the Senate. The petition was received but, however, rejected and dismissed after due consideration of the processes of the petition. The Ethics Committee learned that the petition lacked the due processes of the rules of the chamber.

Consequent to the above action of hers, the Senate decided and ruled that she should be suspended for a period of six months and also withdrew her security details for the stipulated period. Later after this development, her recall process was initiated.

It was alleged that some political establishments in the state, Kogi, who are unhappy about her show of doggedness which has caused the President of the Senate grave embarrassment, orchestrated the move to recall her from the Senate. This allegation, again, was made by the embattled senator herself. She emphatically stated that the President of the Senate had a conversation with the governor of her state, Usman Ododo, on the 12th of March, 2025, to initiate her recall process and fund the expenses.

While the recall process was initiated, it was, however, on the 4th of April, 2025, ruled by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that the recall process fell short of the requirements of Section 69(a) of the constitution. Hence, it failed, and as such, no further action should be taken in that regard.

When contacted to shed more light on the issue of recall and its political implications, a political scientist based in Abuja, Dr. Muttaqa Yushau Abdulrauf, said:

“A recall is a process where members of a particular constituency can stage a process to recall their elected representative, and this is quite stipulated in Section 69 of the Nigerian constitution as part of their democratic right; either due to their discontent or the inability of their elected representative to represent that particular constituency. So, it’s a constitutionally provided right of the constituents.

Advert

However, if one examines all the recall attempts in our Fourth Republic, he would find out that they are orchestrated by a lot of vendetta and as well by the discontent expressed from the top (not from the bottom). What that means is that most of the recall processes are as a result of a particular member not aligning with the political elites at the top (be it the presidency or the ruling party). If one checks the case of the representative of Birnin Kudu, in Jigawa State, Honorable Faruk Adamu, it’s the same thing.

It was an orchestrated attempt because she was a staunch opposition of the then ruling party. The orchestration was tensed to the extent that all the opposition leaders had to gather in Birnin Kudu to protest. The recall didn’t materialize. Another similar case of orchestrated recall process but which doesn’t have a similar root cause is that of Senator Natasha.

It’s obvious from all indications that it’s an orchestrated attempt from the political elites who are not happy with the way and manner she engaged the Senate President. A matter that was supposed to be dealt with by the Senate Committee on Ethics or other laid-down procedures of the National Assembly instead warrants lots of inducements for the constituents to reject and recall their elected representative.

The two attempts highlighted above show that there are clearly initiatives of the elites which didn’t emanate from the discontent of the constituents. So, the clarion call to the custodians of democracy is that the laid-down procedures should be allowed to flourish. Because, in a democratic environment, it’s allowed for dissenting voices to be recognized. That is the essence of the democratic journey. But because of the culture of impunity, favoritism, and not hearing from the contending voices together before passing verdict, democracy is shrinking,” said Dr. Muttaqa.

Conversely, the sexual harassment case which was filed by Senator Natasha was, on the 26th of March, 2025, supported by a mere affidavit. This also sparked lots of debates on the social media space. To the dismay of some of those defending Senator Natasha, an affidavit, instead of ocular proof, was what she presented as support for her petition against the Senate President.

While Nigerians are waiting patiently for the outcome of the petition, Senator Natasha again alleged that the President of the Senate, in collaboration with the former governor of Kogi State and his protégé, Governor Usman Ododo, are planning to have her assassinated. This was revealed during her visit to the state which was tagged “Natasha’s Homecoming,” where she addressed the mammoth crowd that welcomed her.

At this very moment, on the 5th of April, 2025, the court has, on the 4th of April, 2025, barred both parties—Senators Akpabio and Natasha—from granting any interviews henceforth.

According to a renown Political Scientist Dr Kabir Sufi Said said ‘Well, there are several grounds which a legislature can be recalled. One is, when there’s poor representation or when the electorates are not satisfied with the quality of the representation or when there are so many other issues with which there are dissatisfaction on the side of the electorates towards their legislature–which in this case could be a member of the Senate or House of the Representative or a member of the State House of Assembly as provided by the constitution.

He said The section 69 and 110 of the Nigerian constitution are where the recall processes are contained. The process comprises of three things mainly: first of them which is a submission of petition by the constituents, notifying the electoral body that they want to recall their representative(i.e a Senator, House of the Representative member or the State House of Assembly member). Secondly, the petition must be signed by fifty percent of the registered voters in the constituency and as soon as that request is submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), a referendum, which is the last thing, is expected to be conducted within the period of three months(90 days) for the recall of the concerned legislature as explained by the section 110 of the constitution.

The process is a tedious one as it concerns the collection of signatures, and the verification of those signatures by the Independent National Electoral Commission(INEC). So many other issues are explained in the electoral acts(Section 2 and Section 113 of the electoral acts). These sections further explained the process through which INEC would verify the signatures and then conduct the referendum. The process of recall could be said that it’s synonymous with that of impeachment of the President, Vice president, Governors, Deputy Gorvernors and Chairmen. This denotes that, if the various executives mentioned can be checked through impeachments, then the legislatures must, in one way or the other, be checked through the recall processes.

As soon as the petition is received and the aforementioned requirements are met, then the electoral body which is the INEC would make a declaration as to whether the recall process is successful or not.

That being said, the challenges in the recall process as to the initiation of the request to recall a representative and as well the collection and verification of the signatures are another tedious sides of the process. It has been alleged that the said challenges are deliberate efforts from the legislatures who took part in the amendment of the laws since 2010. Because, in reality, it’s difficult to get the fifty percent registered voters to sign the petition where, most elections in this country are won by barely 25 to 27 percent participation. Also, it’s very rare to see a Nigerian that’s consistent with a signature since the verification process warrants that a comparison between the signatures on the voters’ cards and on the petition must be the same. With this analysis, it’s obvious that a recall process is almost impossible to materialize in Nigeria.

According to Dr Sufi ,’However, in a situation whereby the process is successful, the development would be communicated to the affected legislature and a by-election would be conducted in order to have a new representative for the constituents. It’s on this note we are calling for a check into the recall processes and even the impeachment process as well. There’s need for a more realizable processes for these two exercises to be feasible.”

News

President Tinubu Adds Days to Working Vacation, Returns at Weekend

Published

on

 

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu will return to Nigeria this weekend after extending his working vacation in Europe by a few days, the State House announced Monday evening.

The President departed Nigeria on August 30 for London to begin the working vacation, which was initially expected to last three weeks. According to a statement issued by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, the President has since relocated to Paris, France, where he held meetings with French President Emmanuel Macron and businessman Mr. Vincent Bollore, whose media group includes Canal+, Multichoice, and Universal Music Group.

Despite his absence, the statement emphasized that President Tinubu has remained actively engaged with domestic affairs, particularly directing an independent panel to investigate the deaths of 37 illegal miners in Minna following their detention by the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps.

Advert

The President has delegated Vice President Kashim Shettima to represent him at official functions. However, Vice President Shettima departed Abuja on September 20 for New York to attend the 81st United Nations General Assembly. In his absence, Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Senator George Akume, will continue to represent the President at official engagements.

On the political front, the statement noted that Senator Abubakar Yari, Director-General of the Presidential Campaign Council (PCC), has been leading consultations with prominent traditional rulers across the country alongside other notable party leaders.

The extension comes as the President’s initial three-week vacation timeline elapsed, with the State House confirming he will now return to the country at the weekend.

Continue Reading

News

Court Adjourns El-Rufai’s N1 billion Suit Against ICPC, AGF, Police

Published

on

 

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The Federal High Court, Abuja Division, on Monday adjourned a N1 billion rights suit filed by former Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and others until October 27 for a definite hearing.

Others named in the suit are the Inspector-General (IG) of police and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as the second and third respondents, respectively.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik adjourned the suit to allow counsel to the former governor, Akinyemi Aremu, to respond to the counter affidavit filed by the AGF opposing the claims.

When the case was called, Mr Aremu informed the court that the matter was scheduled for hearing.

Counsel for the AGF, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, however, told the court that the AGF had filed a counter affidavit.

She prayed the court for leave to move their motion seeking an extension of time to deem their counter affidavit as being properly filed and served.

El-Rufai’s lawyer, Mr Aremu; Ezekiel Rimamsomte, who appeared for the IG, and the ICPC counsel did not oppose the application, and the judge granted it as prayed.

Mrs Abdulmalik then adjourned the case until October 27 for a definite hearing.

Earlier in the suit, the ex-governor sued the ICPC, the chief magistrate at the Magistrate’s Court of the FCT, Abuja, the IG, and the AGF as first to fourth respondents, respectively.

He, however, dropped the name of the magistrate from the case following his inability to specify the name of the magistrate who was sued as the second respondent, after the judge made the observation.

Mr El-Rufai is, therefore, demanding N1 billion in damages against ICPC, the IG and the AGF.

Advert

In an originating motion on notice marked FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, dated and filed February 20 by Oluwole Iyamu, SAN, the former governor sought seven reliefs.

He prayed the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on February 19 at about 2:00 p.m. by the ICPC and IG amounts to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights.

He said it violated the dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.

He urged the court to declare that “any evidence obtained pursuant to the aforesaid invalid warrant and unlawful search is inadmissible in any proceedings against the applicant, as it was procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.”

Mr El-Rufai, therefore, sought an order of injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further relying on, using, or tendering any evidence or items seized during the unlawful search in any investigation, prosecution, or proceedings involving him.

He sought an order directing the first and third respondents (ICPC and IG) to forthwith return all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together with a detailed inventory thereof.

He also sought an order awarding N1,000,000,000.00 (one billion naira) as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages, among others.

In its counter affidavit, the ICPC said it received a petition against Mr El-Rufai and, acting on it, commenced an investigation that led to the search at his residence.

It argued that its operatives acted under a valid search warrant issued on February 18 and executed on February 19 between 1:37 p.m. and 3:56 p.m. at 12 Mambilla Street, Asokoro, Abuja.

The commission said its officials were accompanied by Nigeria Police Force personnel and that the exercise was witnessed by Mr El-Rufai’s wife, Hadiza El-Rufai, and his son, Mohammed El-Rufai.

The ICPC, which urged the court to dismiss the suit, listed the items allegedly recovered from the residence.

The police, also in its counter affidavit deposed to by Ewa Anthony, argued that it had the statutory power to detect, arrest, investigate and prosecute offenders.

It argued that the search at Mr El-Rufai’s residence was carried out pursuant to a search warrant issued by a competent court of law.

The anti-graft agency disagreed with the ex-governor, insisting the search warrant was a genuine court order.

It said its officers who carried out the operation complied with all applicable legal procedures in executing the search warrant.

According to the police, the applicant is trying to use the honourable court to shield him from the security investigation and prosecution in court.

It, therefore, prayed the court to dismiss the suit in its entirety.

Continue Reading

News

Tinubu Becomes First Post-1999 Nigerian President to Miss Three Consecutive UNGAs

Published

on

 

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

President Bola Tinubu has again delegated Vice President Kashim Shettima to lead Nigeria’s delegation to the 81st United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York, marking the third consecutive year he has personally skipped the global summit since taking office in 2023.

The Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, said on Monday that Tinubu is “currently on annual leave,” describing the delegation to Shettima as “neither unusual nor a diminution of the country’s diplomatic standing”. Idris insisted Shettima “carries the full mandate of the President and the Federal Republic of Nigeria” and will deliver the national statement.

However, the explanation has done little to quell public scrutiny. Tinubu last personally attended UNGA in September 2023 for the 78th session, shortly after his inauguration. He has since been absent from the 79th session in 2024, the 80th in 2025, and now the 81st in 2026—a pattern unmatched by any Nigerian president since the return of democracy in 1999.

Advert

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, through his media aide Phrank Shaibu, demanded a “full explanation,” arguing that three consecutive absences “could no longer be dismissed as coincidence or routine delegation” but constituted “a pattern of presidential evasion”. Atiku questioned whether Tinubu’s “documented history with United States law-enforcement agencies has become a burden on Nigeria’s foreign relations”.

At the centre of the opposition’s claim is a long-standing U.S. forfeiture case in which $460,000 was held in an account linked to Tinubu, after American authorities alleged the funds represented proceeds of narcotics trafficking or were involved in prohibited financial transactions. Atiku also questioned why the administration spent up to $9 million on American lobbyists to improve Nigeria’s standing in Washington while the President repeatedly stays away from New York.

The Presidency has not directly addressed the drug-case allegation. A ruling party chieftain, Olatunbosun Oyintiloye, dismissed the claims as “political propaganda,” noting that no U.S. court has reopened a criminal case or pronounced Tinubu guilty of drug trafficking.

Nigeria’s Permanent Representative to the UN, Jimoh Ibrahim, had earlier announced that Tinubu would attend and that a seat had been secured for him near U.S. President Donald Trump. That seat remained empty.

Continue Reading

Trending