The senator representing the Federal Capital Territory, Ireti Kingibe, has offered her first public remarks concerning the suspension of Kogi Central lawmaker Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, stating that she never reviewed the document reportedly relied upon before the Senate reached its decision.
Speaking during an appearance on Arise Television on Wednesday, Kingibe addressed questions surrounding the circumstances that led to the disciplinary measure and explained her own level of involvement.
She stated that she was not part of the process that considered the report and had no access to its contents at any stage before the action was carried out.
According to the senator, she had been engaged in another official assignment during the period the issue was handled and therefore was not available when discussions around the matter progressed.
Kingibe explained that she had earlier attended activities connected to the Committee on Petitions and Public Complaints alongside several other lawmakers. After completing attendance requirements, she departed to participate in a separate retreat focused on proposed tax policies.
She noted that the tax discussions appeared more urgent because of their direct relevance to residents of the Federal Capital Territory, whom she represents in the upper chamber.
Based on that judgment, she assumed the remaining members and other legislators present would manage deliberations relating to the disciplinary issue.
The senator further disclosed that she later voiced dissatisfaction among colleagues over her inability to examine the material linked to the decision.
She said she openly expressed those concerns to Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe and questioned why she had not been given an opportunity to study the report before conclusions were reached.
Kingibe emphasised that even after the controversy gained public attention, she still has not received or reviewed the document.
Her disclosure has triggered renewed discussion about how the suspension process was conducted and whether lawmakers had adequate access to information before participating in such an important institutional decision.
The development has also added momentum to wider concerns about accountability, openness and procedural fairness in Senate disciplinary actions.
With Kingibe now presenting her version of events, attention may continue to focus on the methods and internal processes that shaped the outcome involving Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
