Join our Telegram group and receive breaking and trending news updates directly on your phone.
Join for News Updates ✕
By Correspondent in Abuja.
The fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, seeking N1 billion in damages against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and four others, suffered a setback on Tuesday following the failure to serve the respondents.
Our correspondent reports that El-Rufai is demanding N1 billion in damages against the ICPC, listed as the 1st respondent, alongside the Chief Magistrate of the Magistrate’s Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja; the Inspector-General of Police (I-G); and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), named as 2nd to 4th respondents, respectively.
The matter, which came up before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court, Abuja, could not proceed when it was called due to the absence of the respondents.
When the case was mentioned, only Ubong Akpan, counsel to the former governor, was in court. There was no legal representation for the respondents.
Akpan informed the court that although the matter was scheduled for mention, the respondents had not been served with the court processes,he therefore sought an adjournment to enable proper service and Justice Abdulmalik subsequently adjourned the matter until March 11 for further mention.
El-Rufai, through his legal team led by Oluwole Iyamu, SAN, is asking the court to declare that the search warrant issued on Feb. 4 by the Chief Magistrate of the Magistrate’s Court of the FCT (2nd respondent), authorising the search and seizure at his residence, was invalid, null and void.
He is praying the court to declare the warrant “null and void for lack of particularity, material drafting errors, ambiguity in execution parameters, overbreadth, and absence of probable cause,” arguing that it constituted an unlawful and unreasonable search in violation of Section 37 of the Constitution.
In the originating motion on notice marked FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, dated and filed on Feb. 20, El-Rufai is seeking seven reliefs:
He is asking the court to declare that the search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on Feb. 19 at about 2 p.m. was carried out by agents of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and the Inspector-General of Police under the disputed warrant.
He argues that the operation constituted a gross violation of his fundamental rights to dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing and privacy, as guaranteed under Sections 34, 35, 36 and 37 of the Constitution.
The former governor further urged the court to declare that any evidence obtained pursuant to the warrant is inadmissible in any proceedings against him, having been procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.
He also sought an order restraining the respondents and their agents from relying on or tendering any evidence or items seized during the search in any investigation or prosecution involving him.
Additionally, he is asking the court to order the ICPC and the I-G to immediately return all items allegedly seized from his residence, along with a detailed inventory.
El-Rufai is also seeking N1 billion as general, exemplary and aggravated damages against the respondents, jointly and severally, for alleged violations of his fundamental rights, including trespass, unlawful seizure, psychological trauma, humiliation, emotional distress, invasion of privacy and reputational harm.
He broke down the claim as follows:
N300 million as compensatory damages for psychological trauma, emotional distress and loss of personal security;
N400 million as exemplary damages to deter future misconduct by law enforcement agencies;
N300 million as aggravated damages for what he described as the malicious, high-handed and oppressive conduct of the respondents.
He is equally seeking N100 million as the cost of filing the suit, including legal fees and other associated expenses.
In his supporting arguments, Iyamu contended that the search warrant was fundamentally defective, citing lack of specificity in the description of items to be seized, material typographical errors, ambiguous execution terms, overbroad directives and absence of verifiable probable cause.
He argued that this contravened Sections 143–148 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015; Section 36 of the ICPC Act, 2000; and constitutional safeguards against arbitrary intrusion.
According to him, Section 143 of the ACJA requires that an application for a search warrant be supported by information in writing and on oath, setting out reasonable grounds for suspicion—an essential requirement he claimed was not met.
He further argued that Section 144 mandates specific descriptions of the premises to be searched and the items sought, to prevent the issuance of general warrants.
However, he maintained that the warrant in question vaguely referred to “the thing aforesaid” without further particulars.
Iyamu added that the execution of the warrant on Feb. 19 allegedly resulted in an unlawful invasion of his client’s residence, violating his constitutional rights to dignity, personal liberty, fair hearing and privacy.
He further contended that the search was carried out without legal justification and in a manner that subjected the former governor to humiliation and distress.
Edited by Dada Ahmed.
