The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday refused the Office of the Attorney General of the Federation’s request to approve an arrest warrant against Senator Natasha Akpoti over a cybercrime charge brought against the female lawmaker.
Justice G. Umar rejected the request after an oral application was made by D. E. Kaswe, an Assistant Director in the Department of Public Prosecutions at the OAGF.
In the six-count charge seen by Nairametrics, Akpoti is accused of violating the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, when she allegedly made certain comments targeting the reputation of the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio.
Count 1 of the charge reads: “That on or about the 1st day of April 2025, while addressing a crowd at Ihima Community, Kogi State, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, you SENATOR NATASHA H. AKPOTI-UDUAGHAN intentionally caused the following communication to be transmitted via a computer system and network, to wit:
‘…and Akpabio told Yahaya Bello, I am saying, standing by what I have said. He told him that he should make sure that killing me does not happen in Abuja, it should be done here, so it will seem as if it is the people that killed me here…’
“And you, SENATOR NATASHA H. AKPOTI-UDUAGHAN, knew this contained a threat that could harm the reputation of Senator Godswill Obot Akpabio, GCON, as the President of the Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
“You thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 24(2)(c) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, and punishable under the same section of the Act.”
AGF’s Case
The federal government, through the AGF, further alleged that on or about the 3rd of April 2025, during a live studio interview programme, “Politics Today,” on Channels TV in Abuja, the lawmaker allegedly intentionally caused a message to be sent via a computer system and network about “the discussions that Akpabio had with Yahaya Bello that night, ehm, to eliminate me…”
The AGF’s office claims that Akpoti knew her remarks were “false” and allegedly intended to cause a breakdown of law and order.
This, the AGF’s office stressed, was contrary to Section 24(1)(b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024, and punishable under the same section of the Act.
What Transpired in Court
- At the court session, Kaswe said the matter was supposed to be the arraignment of the defendant, adding that it was only that morning his team was able to serve the charge on her lawyer, J. J. Usman, SAN.
- Kaswe argued that the presence of the defendant’s lawyer in court allegedly implied that Akpoti was “aware of the case” but refused to appear.
“We want to apply for the issuance of a bench warrant for her inability or wilful refusal to appear before this court,” Kaswe added.
- Responding, Usman said he found the application for the arrest of his client, or a bench warrant, “strange” before the court.
- He added that he had spoken with the prosecution lawyer, informing him that he was instructed by his client to receive the charge on her behalf.
- He highlighted that the prosecution brought the charge against him today at 9:18 a.m.
“I don’t expect him to make an application for a bench warrant,” Usman said, adding that a related charge has been filed against Akpoti at the FCT High Court.
- He urged the court to “dishonor” the application for a bench warrant.
- The judge then asked Kaswe if Senator Akpoti had been personally served with the charge.
- Kaswe said Akpoti had not been served personally, but that she had now been served through her lawyer that morning.
“Awareness is different from personal service,” the judge replied to Kaswe.
“I will not grant your application for a bench warrant,” the judge ruled.
- Kaswe then sought leave to serve the charge by substituted means through the defendant’s lawyer.
- That application was granted, and the court adjourned the matter to June 30 for arraignment.
