Alleged defamation: Court adjourns hearing Natasha Akpoti’s preliminary objection to Feb 2026

Justice Chizoba Oji of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), sitting at Maitama, Abuja, today adjourned the hearing of the preliminary objection raised by the senator representing Kogi Central in the Senate, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, in her trial for alleged defamation of Senate President, Godswill Akpabio and former governor Yahaya Bello of Kogi State to February 23, 2026.

The adjournment followed a request by the prosecution through a letter sent to the court, seeking an adjournment of the case.

Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan is being prosecuted by the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation (OAGF) on a three-count charge bordering on harmful imputation in the charge, marked FCT/HC/CR/297/2025.

She, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge preferred against her.

At the resumed hearing in the case yesterday, counsel for Akpoti-Uduaghan’s lawyer, Ehiogie West-Idahosa SAN, informed the court that the prosecuting counsel, David Kaswe, was absent in court.

Justice Oji, however, said the court received a letter from the prosecution, requesting an adjournment. She subsequently handed the letter to the counsel for the defendant.

After reading the letter, West-Idahosa told the court that the defence was not served with the letter, adding that he noticed that it was even registered and filed yesterday morning.

He added that the application for adjournment by the prosecution was not brought to the notice of the defence 48 hours before the court’s sitting as required by law.

West-Idahosa then urged the court to proceed with the business of the day, which he said was hearing the defendant’s preliminary objection to the charge, as, according to him, the Kogi senator was in court, adding that the application for adjournment was even incompetent.

In her ruling, Justice Oji held that the prosecution’s application for adjournment did not meet the required threshold.

She, however, said that the court was minded to grant the application in the interest of justice and subsequently rejected the defence’s request for the day’s proceedings to go ahead.

She then adjourned the case to February 23, 2026, for the hearing of the defendant’s preliminary objection.

Akpoti-Uduaghan, in her preliminary objection to the charge before the court, is querying the decision of the Office of the AGF to file two similar charges against her at the same time, submitting that this is an abuse of court process.

However, in its counter-affidavit against the preliminary objection, the prosecution faulted Akpoti-Uduaghan’s claim that the charges filed against her before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) and the Federal High Court in Abuja amounted to an abuse of court process.

The prosecution submitted that the three-count charge brought against the defendant before the FCT High Court was filed against her “after a thorough Investigation of the case and a prima facie case was established”.

According to the prosecution, “The three-count charge was preferred against the defendant pursuant to the Penal Code Law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and in the bona fide exercise of the prosecutorial powers of the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation guaranteed under the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999(as amended) and in the best interest of justice.

The actions and conduct of the defendant/applicant (Natasha) contravened the Penal Code Law of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

The prosecution added that the criminal charge against the defendant emanated from the comprehensive and conclusive investigation of the case, including all petitions and parties related to the case by the Nigerian Police Force.

Called from Tribune.