The Anambra State House of Assembly has suspended Hon. Bernard Udemezue, the member representing Ayamelum Constituency, for three months without pay following what the legislature termed “unparliamentary actions” that damaged the institution’s reputation. The suspension was announced on Tuesday during plenary at the Anambra State House of Assembly chambers, marking a significant disciplinary action against the Peoples Democratic Party lawmaker.
The committee’s recommendations, detailed in an official report, stem from Udemezue’s social media activities that allegedly ridiculed the legislative institution. The suspended lawmaker had publicly disclosed constituency allowance information and made serious allegations connecting the state government to criminal activities, prompting the assembly to take decisive action.
According to the committee’s findings, Udemezue’s conduct violated parliamentary ethics and brought disrepute to the 8th Assembly. The report mandates the suspended legislator to issue public apologies to Speaker Rt. Hon. Somtochukwu Nkem Udeze and all members of the assembly. These apologies must be published both on Udemezue’s social media platforms, including WhatsApp and Facebook, and submitted as written documents within five working days.
The suspension carries broader implications beyond the immediate disciplinary measure. The committee has recommended that law enforcement agencies investigate serious criminal allegations raised by Udemezue, particularly claims linking the state government to the kidnap and murder of the late Hon. Justice Azuka, who previously represented Onitsha 1 North Constituency. The committee noted that Udemezue “reportedly revealed rot in the system in the state, including reportedly exposing how the late Justice Azuka, who represented Onitsha 1 North Constituency in the State Assembly, was killed.”
The recommendations specify that both the State Commissioner of Police and the Director of State Security Service for Anambra State should be formally notified to investigate these allegations, as Udemezue allegedly possesses vital information that could aid the investigation. This development transforms what began as a disciplinary matter into a potentially serious criminal investigation involving state-level security agencies.
Beyond the immediate suspension, the committee has outlined comprehensive remedial measures for Udemezue’s return to legislative duties. The suspended lawmaker must undergo specialized training sessions and workshops focused on parliamentary ethics, practices, and duties. The report emphasizes that legislators must conduct themselves properly in accordance with the House’s standing orders, particularly in public spaces.
The committee’s findings also establish broader principles for legislative conduct, explicitly stating that social media platforms cannot serve as approved venues for conducting legislative business. This policy clarification comes as digital communication increasingly influences political discourse and public engagement with elected officials.
During the suspension period, Udemezue is prohibited from entering the State House of Assembly Complex, effectively removing him from all legislative activities and proceedings. The three-month suspension represents a first instance penalty, with the committee warning that the duration could be extended if Udemezue fails to comply with the assembly’s resolutions or continues engaging in what they term “unparliamentary actions.”
The case has drawn attention from advocacy groups who have criticized the assembly’s response to Udemezue’s transparency efforts. Some observers argue that the suspension represents an attempt to silence legitimate oversight activities, particularly regarding the disclosure of constituency allowances and allegations of governmental misconduct.
The committee’s comprehensive approach addresses both immediate disciplinary concerns and longer-term institutional integrity issues. By requiring formal apologies, mandating ethics training, and establishing clear guidelines for social media use by legislators, the assembly aims to prevent similar incidents while maintaining public trust in the legislative process.
The investigation recommendations regarding the late Justice Azuka’s death could potentially expand beyond the immediate disciplinary matter, depending on what information Udemezue provides to law enforcement agencies. This aspect of the case may determine whether the suspension serves primarily as a disciplinary measure or becomes part of a broader criminal investigation.
As the five-day deadline for Udemezue’s written apology approaches, the suspended lawmaker faces critical decisions that will influence both his political future and the potential criminal investigation. The assembly’s actions demonstrate the ongoing tension between legislative transparency, institutional discipline, and public accountability in Nigerian state governance.
