A Federal High Court in Abuja has moved the next hearing date for the cybercrime trial of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan to November 24.
The scheduled hearing for Monday, October 20, was postponed because of protests in parts of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) calling for the release of the detained self-proclaimed leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu.
READ ALSO: Natasha Dares Senate: No apology, no surrender
These demonstrations disrupted regular operations across the FCT, preventing many people from reaching their offices and workplaces.
Inquiries at the court on Tuesday confirmed that the presiding judge, Justice Mohammed Umar, had officially rescheduled the case for November 24.
Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan faces a six-count charge (marked FHC/ABJ/CR/195/2025) filed under the Cybercrimes Prohibition, Prevention, etc. (Amendment) Act 2024. The core of the charges alleges that she used electronic means to share false and harmful information intended to slander, incite violence, endanger lives, and breach public order.
The charge particulars specify claims that, while addressing a gathering in Ihima, Kogi State, on April 4, 2025, Akpoti-Uduaghan alleged that Senate President Godswill Akpabio instructed former Governor Yahaya Bello to have her assassinated in Kogi State. Similar allegations of a plot by the Senate President and Bello to kill her in Kogi State were also reportedly repeated by her during a television interview.
Previous Hearing Blocked by Preliminary Objection
At the last court date on September 22, the prosecution’s plans to present witnesses were halted by a preliminary objection filed by the defense team.
Defense counsel Ehiogie West-Idahosa (SAN) informed the court that his client was challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the matter. West-Idahosa clarified that the objection “is not to the nature of the charge, but the alleged abuse of the prosecutorial powers of the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF).”
The defense also raised a concern about not yet being served copies of the prosecution witnesses’ statements.
Prosecution lawyer David Kaswe strongly argued against allowing the defendant’s objection to disrupt the day’s court proceedings. However, Justice Mohammed Umar noted that the prosecution had not yet responded to the defense’s objection and insisted that they must do so first.
Justice Umar maintained that he would first rule on the defense’s objection before moving forward with any other steps in the case. He had initially adjourned the matter until October 20 for the hearing on the objection, which was subsequently cancelled due to the protest.