Suspended Senator, Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, has petitioned the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC), seeking the disbarment of Chairman, Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Senator Nedamwen Bernards Imasuen, over alleged professional misconduct.
In her petition titled IN THE MATTER OF THE LEGAL PRACTITIONERS ACT 2004, she stated:
“I, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, Adult, Female, Christian, Nigerian citizen of No. 3 Dala Hills Maitama, FCT, Abuja, apply that Nedamwen Bernards Imasuen (SCN007069A) of Suite 1.03, New Senate Building, National Assembly Complex, Three Arm Zone, Central Business District, 900103, Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Nigeria, be required to answer the allegations contained in the Statement/Affidavit which accompanies this application and that such order(s) be made as the Committee shall deem appropriate.”
According to the petition she signed on March 20, 2025, a key issue in her complaint is Senator Imasuen’s alleged past disbarment from the New York Bar and his actions regarding a valid court order. She referenced an online report stating:
“I read an online report wherein it was reported that the Petitioner was permanently disbarred from the New York Bar for professional misconduct, having misappropriated client funds and evaded disciplinary proceedings. A copy of the People’s Gazette online reportage dated March 9, 2025, downloaded using my MacBook Air Laptop with Serial Number C02P54QOG5RP 2016 and an HP LaserJet Printer 30085 on March 18, 2025, which were in good working condition during duration and was receiving constant supply of information in the ordinary course of business, is herein annexed as Exhibit NATASHA 1.”
According to her petition, the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, permanently disbarred Imasuen on May 10, 2010. She asserted:
“The Respondent, Senator Neda Imasuen, was disbarred by the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, on May 10, 2010, for fraud, misappropriation of client funds, and failure to respond to disciplinary authorities. A copy of the Justia New York Case law 2010 title Matter of Imasuen is herein annexed and Marked as Exhibit NATASHA 2.”
ALSO READ: SDP has dispute with misgovernance, not Tinubu — Adebayo
She stated her intention to present further evidence at trial, adding:
“I will lead further evidence from official records of the Respondent’s disbarment at the trial of this case.”
Akpoti-Uduaghan claimed that Imasuen’s disbarment was due to a formal complaint filed by his former client, Daphne Slyfield, who accused him of misappropriating legal fees.
She explained: “This disbarment was imposed following a formal complaint lodged by Daphne Slyfield, a client who paid the Respondent substantial legal fees for representation but was abandoned without legal recourse. The court found that the Respondent had violated multiple professional rules, resulting in the permanent revocation of his legal license in the United States.”
Despite this, she alleged that Imasuen returned to Nigeria, continued practicing law, and entered politics. She stated:
“Following the Petitioner’s disbarment, he relocated to Nigeria, continued to present himself as a legal practitioner and pursued a career in politics, eventually securing a seat in the National Assembly as the Senator representing Edo South Senatorial District.”
She further claimed that despite his past disciplinary record, Imasuen did not disclose his disbarment in either his legal or political career, adding:
“Despite this disbarment which was hinged on unethical conduct, the Respondent failed to disclose this sanction both in the legal profession and political space, as a Senator and was eventually made the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges, and Public Petitions, a position requiring unimpeachable integrity.”
According to her, Imasuen also omitted this information in official documents submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), stating:
“The Respondent did not remotely disclose his disbarment either in his FORM EC-9 – Particulars of Personal Information submitted to INEC on oath.”
Her petition also challenges his handling of a court order related to her suspension, accusing him of contempt.
and then