Signatures attached to the report were allegedly taken from the attendance register.
The controversy surrounding the suspension of the Kogi Central Senator, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, has deepened, with allegations that the signatures attached to the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions' report were not for the endorsement of the suspension but rather attendance records.
This led to confusion at a closed-door Senate meeting as some senators reportedly claimed their signatures were misrepresented to give the impression of unanimous support for the suspension.
Attendance or endorsement?
On 5 March, members of the Senate Committee on Ethics convened to investigate the seat rearrangement dispute between Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan and the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio. On that day, senators who attended the committee's sitting signed the attendance register, while others abstained.
Based on the Senate's rules, all senators can attend committee meetings, whether or not they are members of such a committee. Also, all the senators who attend a committee's meeting can sign the attendance register.
On 6 March, when the ethics committee chairman, Neda Imasuen, presented its report on the floor of the Senate, the attendance sheet's signatures were included, creating the impression that all signatories endorsed the committee's recommendations.
One of the key recommendations in the report was to prohibit Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan from identifying herself as a senator, both locally and internationally, for the six months she would be on suspension.
Some senators who signed the attendance register have now reportedly distanced themselves from the report with the argument that they were not allowed to review the final draft before it was presented on the floor of the Senate. A senator who attended the meeting where the matter was discussed but requested not to be named told PREMIUM TIMES that the proper process should have been for the committee members to examine and approve the report before its presentation. However, members were unaware of its content until it was publicly read on the Senate floor.
The suspension
On 6 March, the Senate voted to suspend Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan for six months following the ethics committee's recommendations.
The decision was based on the ethics committee's report which indicter her for alleged misconduct during a plenary session on 20 February and her refusal to adhere to the chamber's sitting arrangement.
The Senate also imposed several penalties on her, including the withdrawal of all her security aides and the closure of her office within the National Assembly.
All Senate properties in her possession would be handed over to the Clerk to the National Assembly. At the same time, she was also prohibited from entering the National Assembly premises during the suspension period.
Her salary and allowances were also suspended for the duration of the suspension, just as she was banned from representing herself as a senator, both locally and internationally
However, the Senate left a door open for the suspension to be lifted if Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan submits a written apology, which the leadership may consider before the full six-month period expires.
On Tuesday, Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan took her case to the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU), seeking international intervention in her suspension from the Senate.
She addressed delegates at an IPU meeting held at the United Nations headquarters in New York, during which she also raised allegations of sexual harassment against Mr Akpabio.
The Kogi senator described her suspension from the Senate as unlawful and a deliberate attempt to silence her for speaking out against alleged misconduct in the Nigerian upper legislative chamber.
Senators push back against signature use
Our source also confirmed that some of Mr Imasuen's colleagues in the committee expressed concern about the improper use of their signatures during a closed-door meeting on Wednesday, which lasted about two hours.
According to the lawmaker, those who objected to using their signatures were two senators from the North-west geopolitical zone, one from the North-east and another from the North-central.
They reportedly argued that their signatures were misused because they did not explicitly consent to the report's recommendations.
Their position is based on the principle that signing an attendance register does not equate to endorsing a resolution. They insisted that their signatures should not have been attached to a report they neither reviewed nor approved.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
The senators also emphasised that the report should have been circulated among all committee members before being presented to ensure transparency and due process.
Despite these senators raising their concerns at the closed-door meeting, none of them has done so publicly and PREMIUM TIMES' efforts to reach out to them individually were unsuccessful.
Argument on endorsement
On the opposing side at the closed-door meeting, some senators argued that attendance at a meeting implies participation in any decisions made during that session. They contended that once a decision is reached within a committee, there is no need for additional signatures.
The opposing argument implies that a senator's presence at a meeting means they acknowledged the decision, whether they explicitly signed the recommendation or not.
This controversy arround signatures further fuels concerns that the suspension of Mrs Akpoti-Uduaghan was decided without due process.
Mr Imasuen could not be reached for comment. He did not pick up PREMIUM TIMES' calls to his mobile telephone or respond to a text message.
Also, this newspaper could not reach the trio of Daura, Katung and Kingibe as their phones were not connecting.
