Nigeria’s ongoing experiment with the recall process has once again sparked political tension, drama, and anxiety.

Just two weeks ago, constituents of Kogi Central initiated a recall process against their senator, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, following her suspension from the Senate over alleged misconduct.

For context, Senator Natasha was suspended for six months by the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, chaired by Senator Neda Imasuen.

The suspension followed a heated exchange between the Kogi senator and Senate President Godswill Akpabio over a seat rearrangement.

While Natasha later accused Akpabio of sexual harassment, her constituents insisted the recall was necessary because she was no longer representing their interests, arguing that her suspension effectively denied them representation for six months.

After a court in Lokoja lifted its injunction, the constituents proceeded with the process.

On Monday, March 24, 2025, a petition containing six bags of signatures from Natasha’s constituents was submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

One of the petitioners, Mrs. Charity Omole, stated, “Over half of the 474,554 registered voters spread across 902 polling units in 57 registration areas (wards) in the five local government areas of Adavi, Ajaokuta, Ogori/Magongo, Okehi, and Okene signed the petition.”

However, INEC has raised concerns over the petition, stating that it “lacks contact details to meet requirements.”

The commission emphasized that the recall process is guided by the 1999 Constitution, the Electoral Act 2022, and INEC’s detailed Regulations and Guidelines for Recall 2024, assuring that “all petitions will be treated in strict compliance with the legal framework.”

While past recall attempts have largely failed, Natasha’s case is not the first in Nigeria since the return of democracy in 1999.

Some lawmakers who have faced similar situations include:

Architect George Ike Okoye

In 2000, the first recorded recall attempt in Nigeria’s Fourth Republic targeted Architect Okoye, who represented Njikoka II State Constituency in Anambra State under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

Following a petition submitted to INEC, a referendum was conducted.

However, Okoye challenged the process, claiming that the signatories in the petition were different from those in the voters’ register.

He also secured a court order restraining INEC from proceeding.

Nonetheless, INEC appealed the matter and obtained a favorable ruling.

However, the recall process ultimately failed at the referendum stage due to low voter turnout.

Simon Lalong

Lalong, who was then Speaker of the Plateau State House of Assembly, also faced a recall attempt. Like Okoye, his recall process stalled at the referendum stage.

The exercise failed because it did not secure the required 50 percent of registered voters in the Shendam State Constituency.

Despite this, Lalong went on to become governor of Plateau State and is now a senator in the National Assembly.

Farouk Adamu

Farouk, who represented Birnin-Kudu/Buji Federal Constituency of Jigawa State in the House of Representatives, was also targeted for recall.

INEC conducted a referendum on August 12, 2006, where 61,117 constituents voted in favor of his recall, while 20,324 opposed it.

However, despite the margin, the process failed to meet INEC’s full requirements, and Farouk retained his seat.

Dino Melaye

Before Natasha, one of the most widely known recall attempts involved former Senator Dino Melaye, also from Kogi State.

In 2017, a group called “Concerned Indigenes of Kogi West” launched the “Dino-Must-Go” campaign.

The petitioners submitted six bags of documents containing signatures from voters across six council areas in the senatorial district to INEC on May 21, 2017.

According to their petition, the recall secured endorsements from 52.3 percent of the 360,000 registered voters in the district—more than the required 50.1 percent.

Melaye dismissed the recall attempt as a “comedy of errors” and accused the then-state governor, Yahaya Bello, of orchestrating the move.

INEC proceeded with the process, notifying Melaye and unveiling a timetable for the exercise.

However, the recall attempt stalled after an Abuja Federal High Court ordered all parties to maintain the status quo.

Other Lawmakers Who Faced Recall Threats

Beyond these cases, some lawmakers have been threatened with recall, though their constituents never formally submitted petitions to INEC.

Among them was former Senate President Bukola Saraki, whom the Kwara Youth Stakeholders Forum (KYSF) threatened to recall over a dispute between the National Assembly and the federal government.

Other lawmakers who faced recall threats include:

• Abdulmumin Jibrin Kofa, who represented Bebeji/Kiru Federal Constituency of Kano State.
• Senator Suleiman Othman Hunkuyi, who represented Kaduna North Senatorial District.
• Senator Sunny Ogbuoji, who represented Ebonyi South Senatorial District.

DAILY GAZETTE reports that Nigeria’s recall process has yet to succeed.

Senator Imasuen, 

Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has filed a petition before the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), seeking the disbarment of Senator Nedamwem Imasuen, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, over allegations of fraud and disregard for a court order.

The petition, dated March 20 and submitted to the LPDC on March 24, alleges that Imasuen was previously disbarred in the United States over professional misconduct.

Akpoti-Uduaghan claims that “the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, had previously found Imasuen guilty of fraud, misappropriation of client funds, and failure to comply with disciplinary authorities.”

According to her, the Edo South senator was disbarred on May 10, 2010, following a complaint by a client, Daphne Slyfield, who accused him of abandoning her case despite collecting substantial legal fees.

To support her claim, she submitted a copy of the Justia New York Case Law 2010 and pledged to provide further evidence during the hearing.

She argues that “he did not disclose his disbarment either in his Form EC-9 he submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) while contesting for office and eventually became the senator representing Edo South Senatorial District.”

Akpoti-Uduaghan insists that such a history of professional misconduct makes Imasuen unfit to chair the Senate Ethics Committee, stating that “this position requires unquestionable integrity.”

Beyond the fraud allegations, Akpoti-Uduaghan is also seeking disciplinary action against Imasuen for allegedly defying a court order.

She claims that the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Obiora Egwuatu, had on March 4 restrained Imasuen’s committee from investigating her over alleged misconduct at a Senate plenary in February.

However, “the Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions Committee led by the Respondent proceeded, in blatant disobedience of the said ex-parte order, to conduct its investigation on March 5, 2025, regarding my alleged misconduct during the Senate plenary session of 20 February 2025.”

She further stated that, “in a concerning display of procedural bias, the same Senate committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions chaired by the Respondent proceeded with the purported investigation and recommended me for sanctions.”

The committee, she claims, submitted its report to the Senate on March 6, leading to her six-month suspension, which included the withdrawal of her salary, allowances, security aides, and access to Senate premises.

She maintains that this action was taken despite a “subsisting interim court order from the Federal High Court, Abuja Judicial Division (Suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/384/25), restraining the Senate and its Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions from proceeding with any investigation against me pending the determination of the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction.”

To back her petition, she submitted a video as evidence of Imasuen’s alleged disregard for the court order.

“A copy of the video showing the Respondent openly disregarding the Orders of a court of competent jurisdiction under reference along with the Certificate of Compliance with Section 84 of the Evidence Act is herein annexed as Exhibit NATASHA 6.”

She further argued that “this blatant disobedience of a binding and subsisting court order under a misguided belief constitutes contempt of court and a clear violation of legal ethics, as enshrined in Rule 31 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2023, which mandates that a lawyer shall always treat the Court with respect, dignity, and honour.”

Akpoti-Uduaghan also accused Imasuen of bias in handling a petition she had earlier filed against Senate President Godswill Akpabio, alleging sexual harassment.

According to her, “rather than ensuring a fair and impartial inquiry into the matter, the committee dismissed the petition on procedural grounds, declaring it ‘dead on arrival’ due to the fact I personally signed same and the fact that the matter was sub judice.”

She also noted that “in a concerning display of procedural bias, the Respondent as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privilege and Public Petitions proceeded to entertain a petition, investigate and ultimately sanction me for alleged misconduct, culminating in my six-month suspension from the Senate after acknowledging the existence of an order of court.”

Akpoti-Uduaghan insists that Imasuen’s conduct demonstrates “blatant defiance of a binding order of court” and violates the Rules of Professional Conduct for legal practitioners.

She pointed out that Rule 1 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, 2023, mandates that “a lawyer shall uphold and observe the rule of law, promote and foster the course of justice, maintain a high standard of professional conduct and shall not engage in any conduct which is unbecoming of a Legal Practitioner.”

She concluded by emphasizing that Imasuen, as Chair of the Senate Ethics Committee, should not have presided over the proceedings against her, especially after dismissing her own petition against Akpabio on procedural grounds.

She believes his actions undermine the credibility of the committee and called on the LPDC to take appropriate action.

Martins Oke,

A political storm is brewing in Enugu State as registered voters from the Igbo-Etiti/Uzo-Uwani Federal Constituency have formally petitioned the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to recall their House of Representatives member, Rt. Hon. Martins Oke.

In a petition made available to DAILY GAZETTE, which was dated March 27, 2025, and addressed to the INEC Chairman, the constituents—led by Mr. Ugwuagbo Emmanuel Chizoba, alongside Mr. Clinton Ogbonna, Mr. Sabinus Amah, and Mr. Stephen Okenwa—cited multiple reasons for their demand, including alleged electoral injustice, non-performance, lack of constituency engagement, and incompetence.

The petitioners claim that Oke, who is serving his third term in the National Assembly, was not their legitimate choice during the last election.

According to them, he lost at the polls but was declared the winner by the Court of Appeal on what they described as “technical grounds.”

They insist that he “snatched the mandate through the courts” and are determined to reclaim it through the constitutional recall process.

Beyond contesting his legitimacy, the constituents accuse the lawmaker of gross underperformance.

They argue that despite spending years in the House of Representatives, Oke has not sponsored any significant bills or motions and has failed to deliver tangible constituency projects.

“He contributes nothing to local, state, or national discourse. We don’t see him at home, we don’t see him on TV, and we still don’t see him in the National Assembly chambers,” the petition reads.

The lawmakers’ critics further allege that he has abandoned his constituency, failing to establish a functional constituency office or engage with the people through town hall meetings.

“He is completely disconnected from the electorate,” they claim.

To back their petition, the constituents say they have secured signatures from at least 50% plus one of the registered voters in the constituency, meeting the constitutional threshold for initiating a recall process.

They have submitted the list of signatories and voters’ registration details to INEC for verification.

The petitioners have urged INEC to act swiftly in line with Section 69 of the 1999 Constitution by conducting a referendum on the recall within the stipulated 90-day period.

Meanwhile, the move has sparked reactions across political circles in Enugu State.

While Oke’s supporters argue that the recall attempt is politically motivated, many constituents insist it is a genuine demand for accountability and representation.

DAILY GAZETTE reports that INEC is yet to respond to the petition.

For those who wish to sign the petition, the organizers have provided an online link: Click here to sign.