Fresh Charges Against Natasha: Cybercrime or Witch Hunt?

Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan

In a development raising new concerns about political freedom and judicial impartiality, the Federal Government of Nigeria has filed fresh cybercrime charges against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, the embattled representative of Kogi Central. The latest charge was brought under the Cybercrime (Prohibition) Act, 2024 (as amended) and is being viewed by many as the latest move in a growing political showdown between the lawmaker and some of Nigeria’s most powerful political figures.

New Charge Details

Filed on May 22, 2025, at the Federal High Court in Abuja, the charge—marked FHC/ABJ/CR/195/25 alleges that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan made online statements that could “injure the public image” of Senate President Godswill Akpabio and former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello. The case invokes Sections 24(1)(b) and 24(2)(c) of the Cybercrime Act, covering online communications deemed to cause reputational harm or incite public unrest.

This comes just weeks after a separate case (CR/297/25) was filed against the Senator at the FCT High Court under Section 392 of the Penal Code, which deals with criminal defamation.

Double Jeopardy? Legal Community Questions Forum Shopping

Legal experts are raising red flags over what they call “forum shopping” the practice of filing similar charges in multiple courts, potentially to increase prosecutorial advantage or overwhelm the accused. Critics argue that filing both a cybercrime and a defamation charge over the same comments could be viewed as judicial harassment.

“This sets a dangerous precedent,” said Lagos-based constitutional lawyer Ayo Oladele. “It risks undermining public confidence in the independence of our judiciary and suggests a calculated attempt to suppress dissent.”

Senator Natasha Speaks Out

In a strongly worded statement, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan dismissed the allegations as politically motivated.

“This is not about justice. It’s about silencing me. I will not be intimidated by those who fear accountability,” she said.

The Senator has been an outspoken critic of alleged corruption under Yahaya Bello's tenure and has clashed openly with key figures in the ruling party. Her suspension from the Senate earlier this year, after a heated exchange on the chamber floor, was widely criticized as disproportionate and unconstitutional.

Court Dates & Legal Timeline

• June 19, 2025 – Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan was granted bail by the FCT High Court.

• June 30, 2025 – She is scheduled to appear for arraignment at the Federal High Court in Abuja under the new cybercrime charge.

Sources within her legal team confirm that a motion to quash one or both cases may be filed, citing abuse of court process and political persecution.

Broader Implications: Free Speech or Cybercrime?

This case comes at a time when Nigeria’s Cybercrime Act is under increasing scrutiny for its vague language and potential for abuse. Human rights groups argue that the law is too often used as a weapon against whistleblowers, journalists, and opposition figures.

“What we’re seeing is the criminalization of dissent,” said Bukola Ilesanmi, spokesperson for Civic Rights Watch Nigeria. “If a Senator can be prosecuted under cybercrime laws for her political opinions, then democracy is truly under threat.”

A Political Test Case

Observers say this legal battle could become a litmus test for Nigeria’s democratic resilience. It highlights the enduring tension between freedom of expression and political power in a nation still grappling with how to balance both.

If the courts proceed with the charges, it could:

• Set a precedent for using cybercrime laws to prosecute political speech.

• Chill dissent among opposition lawmakers and activists.

• Undermine Nigeria’s global reputation as a democratic state committed to human rights.

Conclusion: Justice or Political Weaponization?

As Senator Natasha prepares to face her accusers in court once again, the stakes are far greater than one woman’s reputation. The outcome could define the boundaries of political speech, set a judicial tone for future cases, and test Nigeria’s commitment to free expression in the digital age.