Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan cybercrime trial delayed as defence raises jurisdictional objection and cites failure to receive prosecution witness statements

Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan cybercrime trial was stalled on Monday at the Federal High Court in Abuja following a jurisdictional objection raised by her legal team.

Also read: Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan Suspension Upheld by NASS

The suspended Kogi Central Senator, currently facing a six-count cybercrime charge brought by the Federal Government, will now await a ruling on the defence’s preliminary motion before trial proceedings can begin.

The prosecution had planned to commence its case by calling the first witness, with a television screen already installed in court for the presentation of evidence.

However, defence counsel, Ehiogie West-Idahosa, SAN, objected to the start of the trial, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction and accusing the prosecution of abusing the powers of the Attorney-General of the Federation.

Akpoti-Uduaghan, who was arraigned on 30 June 2025 and granted bail on self-recognition, is accused of using electronic communication to transmit false and harmful statements against Senate President Godswill Akpabio and former Kogi Governor Yahaya Bello.

The charges stem from an alleged speech made on 1 April 2025 at Ihima, Kogi State, in which the senator reportedly stated that Akpabio instructed Bello to ensure she was killed locally, rather than in Abuja, to give the impression that her death was a community act.

The statements were allegedly repeated during a televised interview.

According to the prosecution, her remarks contravene Section 24(2)(c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, as they contained threats likely to incite violence and damage reputations.

But West-Idahosa informed the court that the defence had filed a notice of preliminary objection challenging the court’s authority to entertain the matter.

He clarified that the objection was not directed at the nature of the offence but rather at what he described as a misuse of prosecutorial discretion.

He further complained that the prosecution had not furnished the defence with statements from its witnesses, making it difficult to proceed even if the objection were overruled.

Lead prosecutor David Kaswe, representing the Federal Government, argued that the objection should not halt proceedings.

However, trial judge Justice Mohammed Umar ruled otherwise, stating that the court must first determine the validity of the objection before proceeding to trial.

The case was adjourned to 20 October 2025 for hearing of the objection and potential commencement of trial.

Also read: Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan Set to Resume After Suspension

This high-profile case, involving allegations of political intimidation and cyber defamation, has drawn significant public interest, with legal experts watching closely how the amended Cybercrimes Act will be interpreted in such a politically sensitive matter.