Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan recall battle: Criticizing INEC’s integrity

Nigeria’s political landscape was again shaken with tension as the saga of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s recall unfolds. The Kogi Central Senator, a strong advocate and a rare female voice in Nigeria’s male-dominated Senate, finds herself at the heart of a contentious recall effort, one that has raised up fierce debate about democratic rights, institutional credibility, and the unseen plots of power.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), tasked with overseeing this process, stands under a microscope, its every move dissected for signs of bias or resilience. What began as a petition from her constituents has ballooned into a national spectacle, raising critical questions: Is this a legitimate exercise of democratic will, or a politically orchestrated vendetta? And can INEC uphold its mandate as an impartial electoral umpire?

How the controversy began

The recall effort ignited on March 24, 2025, when a group identifying as the Kogi Central Political Frontier and Concerned Kogi Youth and Women submitted a petition to INEC’s Abuja headquarters. Signed by lead petitioner Salihu Habib, the document claimed over 250,000 signatures, purportedly more than half of Kogi Central’s 474,554 registered voters, demanding Akpoti-Uduaghan’s removal. The allegations? Gross misconduct, abuse of office, and behavior that “tarnished the integrity of the Nigerian Senate.” The petition followed a tumultuous period for the senator, who was suspended for six months after accusing Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment, an explosive claim that rocked the National Assembly.

Akpoti-Uduaghan, a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) figure who fought legal battles to secure her seat in November 2023, did not surrender. Yet, whispers of political retribution continued fueled by Akpoti-Uduaghan’s public spat with Akpabio, former Kogi Governor Yahaya Bello, and current Governor Ahmed Ododo, all hailing from her district.

READ ALSO

Who’s Ahmed Usman Ododo? All you need to know about Kogi’s governor-elect

INEC’s controversial journey

INEC’s handling of the recall has become a crucial point to study about the Nigerian democracy. Initially, the commission stumbled when the petition lacked petitioners’ contact details, prompting Akpoti-Uduaghan’s legal team, led by J.S. Okutepa SAN, to cry foul. “INEC is aiding illicit acts,” she charged on April 1, accusing the body of guiding petitioners to perfect their case rather than dismissing it outright. By March 26, INEC notified the senator and Akpabio of the petition’s receipt after the petitioners amended it with phone numbers and emails, signaling the process would advance to signature verification, a step requiring over 237,278 valid voter signatures under Section 69 of Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution.

Then came the twist. On April 3, INEC abruptly halted the process, declaring the petition failed to meet constitutional needs. National Commissioner Sam Olumekun revealed that of the 208,132 signatures submitted across 902 polling units, too few met the threshold of “more than half” the district’s voters. “No further action will be taken,” INEC stated via multiple media platforms, a decision Akpoti-Uduaghan hailed as a victory for Kogi Central and Nigeria. However the sudden shift, from verification to rejection, left observers questioning: Was this a triumph of due process or a capitulation to pressure?

Understanding the shadows of Nigerian politics

Critics like myself see a darker narrative. Posts on social media and reports from mainstream media platforms point fingers at the All Progressives Congress (APC), noting that Charity Omole, who delivered the petition, is a special adviser to Governor Ododo, who is the head of APC in Kogi state. Allegations emerged from Akpoti-Uduaghan camp claiming that this is an orchestrated attempt from Akpabio or other members of APC who do not wish her well, branding the signatures “questionable” and possibly forged. Akpoti-Uduaghan herself did not mince words, affirming the allegations, framing the recall as revenge for her defiance.

Judging the time period of the situation, one can begin to reason truth in the above theory. Her suspension and the recall push followed immediately from her public spat with Akpabio, who she accused of harassment after resisting a seating change, a move some regarded it as petty Senate politics, others as gender intimidation. The Kogi government’s ban on her April 1 homecoming rally, citing security reasons, only made suspicions of a coordinated clampdown turning to truth.

Regardless, the petitioners’ grievances, however large, cannot be wholly dismissed. Claims of “deceitful behavior” and “embarrassment” to Kogi Central suggest discontent, though no specifics beyond her Senate clash surfaced. In a district with a good history of political contention, could this reflect genuine voter fatigue, or is it, as her camp insists, a plot by elites she’s challenged?

Criticizing the credibility of INEC

INEC’s role is the climax of the story and now its credibility hangs in the balance. The commission’s early unsteadiness, guiding petitioners to fix their submission, drew both curiosity and anger from Akpoti-Uduaghan’s allies, who saw bias toward her foes. Civil society groups and other well-meaning Nigerians demanded “transparency and fairness,” warning against manipulation. I noted INEC’s admission that recalls cost more than elections, hinting at logistical reluctance. Meanwhile, Akpoti-Uduaghan’s preemptive call on April 1 for Chairman Mahmood Yakubu to “redeem himself” reflected a broader distrust in an institution bruised by past electoral controversies.

The rejection could be viewed in two ways: first a principled stand on constitutional rigour or secondly, a way to avoid a divisive referendum. With only 208,132 signatures verified against a 237,278 minimum, the math does not add up. However, why proceed to verification only to backtrack? Some speculate external pressure, perhaps from her court injunction attempts which could have swayed INEC. Others see a body wary of stoking unrest in a polarized polity.

Conclusion

This saga transcends one senator. Nigeria’s democracy, still maturing, hinges on citizens’ ability to hold leaders accountable and be heard when they do. Section 69 empowers voters to recall lawmakers, a right never successfully exercised in the nation’s history. Akpoti-Uduaghan’s case tests whether this mechanism is a tool for the people or a weapon for the powerful. Her defiance is a representation of a broader struggles, against gender bias, political dynasties, and institutional frailty.

For INEC, it is a chance to prove it can weather political storms without wavering. As Akpoti-Uduaghan vows to serve “till 2027 and beyond,” the recall which collapsed today feels less like an end and more like a pause in a larger battle. Nigeria watches, waiting to see if its democracy is still beating or if it is just in a deep sleep?