Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday, September 21, 2026, adjourned the N1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission, the Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney-General of the Federation to October 27, 2026, for a definite hearing. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik fixed the new date after the AGF's counsel, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, informed the court that a counter-affidavit opposing El-Rufai's claims had been filed. El-Rufai's lawyer, Akinyemi Aremu, is expected to respond to the counter-affidavit before the substantive hearing.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026 and filed on February 20, 2026, by Oluwole Iyamu, SAN, arises from the search of El-Rufai's residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on February 19, 2026. Officers of the ICPC and the Nigeria Police Force stormed the residence at about 2 p.m. under what El-Rufai describes as a defective search warrant issued on or about February 4, 2026. The former governor was subsequently detained for 14 days, an experience that his legal team says caused him psychological trauma, emotional distress, reputational harm, and a profound violation of his constitutional rights.
El-Rufai is seeking seven reliefs from the court. He wants a declaration that the search warrant was invalid, null, and void for lack of particularity, material drafting errors, ambiguity in execution parameters, overbreadth, and absence of probable cause, thereby constituting an unlawful and unreasonable search in violation of Section 37 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to privacy. He is also asking the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence amounted to a gross violation of his fundamental rights to dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the 1999 Constitution.
Beyond the declarations, El-Rufai wants the court to declare that any evidence obtained from the search is inadmissible in any proceedings against him because it was procured pursuant to an invalid warrant and an unlawful search. He is seeking an injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from relying on, using, or tendering any items or evidence seized during the search in any investigation, prosecution, or other proceedings involving him. He is also asking for an order directing the ICPC and the IGP to return all items allegedly seized from his residence, together with a detailed inventory of those items.
The financial component of the suit is substantial. El-Rufai is claiming N1 billion as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages. He broke down the claim into 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 and vindicate his rights; and N300 million as aggravated damages for what he described as the malicious, high-handed, and oppressive nature of the respondents' actions, including the use of a patently defective warrant procured through misleading representations. He is also seeking N100 million as the cost of filing the suit, including legal fees and associated expenses.
The AGF has urged the court to dismiss the suit as lacking in merit. In a counter-affidavit filed through a lawyer from the Federal Ministry of Justice, the AGF contended that El-Rufai failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action to warrant the grant of the reliefs he is seeking. The AGF denied the allegation that the applicant's rights were violated and insisted that both the ICPC and the IGP acted within the bounds of the law. The AGF's position is that the suit is incompetent and should be dismissed. When the matter was called on Monday, Aremu told the court that it was scheduled for hearing. Lami-Shiru, however, informed the court that her client had filed a counter-affidavit and sought leave to regularise it by extending the time within which it could be deemed properly filed and served. Aremu, counsel to the IGP, ACP Ezekiel Rimamsomte, and counsel to the ICPC did not oppose the application, and Justice Abdulmalik granted it as prayed.
The ICPC has also opposed the suit, insisting that its operatives acted on the strength of a valid search warrant issued on February 18, 2026, and executed the following day between 1:37 p.m. and 3:56 p.m. The commission said police personnel accompanied its officials during the operation and that the search was witnessed by El-Rufai's wife, Hadiza, and his son, Mohammed. The ICPC has also disclosed that it recovered electronic devices and documents from the residence, which it said were relevant to its investigation into a petition filed against the former governor. The agency maintained that the warrant was valid and that the search was conducted in accordance with the law.
The dispute has drawn significant public attention, not least because of El-Rufai's political stature and his ongoing battles with the Federal Government. El-Rufai served as governor of Kaduna State from 2015 to 2023 and previously as Minister of the Federal Capital Territory under President Olusegun Obasanjo. He has been a vocal critic of the Tinubu administration, and his detention and prosecution have been viewed by supporters as politically motivated. The suit raises fundamental questions about the limits of state power, the sanctity of the home, and the protections afforded to citizens under the Constitution.
The outcome of the case could have far-reaching implications for the use of search warrants by anti-corruption agencies and the admissibility of evidence obtained through searches that are later challenged as unlawful. If El-Rufai succeeds in having the warrant declared invalid and the evidence obtained from the search declared inadmissible, it would set a significant precedent for the protection of constitutional rights in Nigeria. If the court dismisses the suit, it would reinforce the powers of law enforcement agencies to conduct searches based on warrants issued by magistrates.
El-Rufai's legal team, led by Iyamu, has argued that the warrant contravened provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and the ICPC Act 2000, particularly Sections 143 to 148 of the ACJA, which require specificity, proper form, and reasonable grounds for suspicion in the issuance of search warrants. They have also alleged that the officers failed to comply with procedural requirements, including submitting themselves for search before conducting the operation. The respondents have denied these claims and insisted that the law was followed.
The case will return to court on October 27, 2026, when Justice Abdulmalik will hear the substantive arguments and determine whether El-Rufai's rights were violated and whether he is entitled to the reliefs he seeks. For now, the former governor's battle with the Federal Government remains unresolved, and the N1 billion question at the heart of the suit awaits the court's judgment.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments