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 high-profile legal battle that stirred nationwide debate.
Court records 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 preferred against the lawmaker.
The case, which attracted intense public scrutiny, arose from comments allegedly made by Akpoti-Uduaghan during a televised interview. Its prosecution sparked sustained discussions on freedom of expression, political accountability, and the scope of prosecutorial powers in a democratic society.
The Notice of Discontinuance, dated December 12, 2025, effectively terminated proceedings in suit number FHC/ABJ/CR/195/2025.
Presiding over the matter, Justice C. N. Oji acknowledged the notice and accordingly struck out the case. In his remarks, the judge said the development highlighted the importance of restraint in the exercise of prosecutorial authority.
“The court hopes that this decision will pave the way for restraint, healing, and respect for the rule of law in our democratic process,” Justice Oji said.
Counsel to the Federal Government confirmed the withdrawal of the charges in open court.
“On behalf of the Honourable Attorney-General of the Federation, we have filed a notice of discontinuance in line with the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act. This decision is taken in the overall interest of justice and public confidence in the legal system,” he stated.
Reacting after the court session, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan described the outcome as a vindication of her stance.
“Today’s outcome affirms my belief in the rule of law. I remain committed to serving my constituents and defending the democratic rights of all Nigerians,” she said, while thanking her legal team and supporters for their steadfast support.
The striking out of the charges follows months of legal controversy and sustained public discourse, with several civil society organisations and rights groups previously condemning the case as an attempt to stifle free speech and political participation.
