The National Assembly has rejected a demand by the law firm of Ojukwu Chikaosolu & Co. for the payment of professional legal fees arising from its involvement in the legal dispute involving Kogi Central Senator, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
In a formal response obtained in Abuja, the National Assembly maintained that the Office of the Clerk to the National Assembly neither engaged nor authorised the law firm to represent it in the case and therefore bears no responsibility for the fees being claimed.
The position was conveyed in a pre-action response dated July 20, 2026, issued by the Directorate of Legal Services on behalf of the Clerk to the National Assembly.
According to the response, the National Assembly reviewed the law firm’s demand and accompanying documents but found no contractual or administrative relationship between the Office of the Clerk and the legal practitioners.
The legislature explained that under its administrative procedures, the engagement of external solicitors is processed through the Directorate of Legal Services under the authority of the Clerk to the National Assembly.
It further stated that the letter of instruction attached to the fee demand originated from the Office of the President of the Senate and was signed by the Chief of Staff to the Senate President rather than the Clerk’s office.
Consequently, the National Assembly declined liability for the professional fees and advised the law firm to direct its claim to the office that issued the instruction.
The development has, however, sparked strong criticism from the lead counsel, Chief Chikaosolu Ojukwu (SAN), who accused the Clerk to the National Assembly and the Director of Legal Services of undermining the authority of Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
Ojukwu insisted that his firm was lawfully engaged by the Senate President to represent the Senate in the highly publicised legal dispute arising from Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension.
According to him, any concerns regarding internal procedures should have been resolved within the National Assembly rather than communicated directly to his chambers.
The senior advocate argued that throughout the court proceedings, there was no objection to his firm’s representation of the Senate and questioned why the issue was being raised after the conclusion of the matter.
He further alleged that the actions of the Clerk and the Director of Legal Services amounted to insubordination and called for their resignation.
The dispute adds another dimension to the ongoing legal controversies surrounding Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension, which has generated several court cases involving questions of legislative procedure, disciplinary powers and constitutional governance.
Observers say the disagreement over legal representation and payment obligations may ultimately require further legal or administrative resolution.
