Former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai’s rights enforcement suit against Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and four others suffered a setback on Tuesday over the inability of his lawyers to serve the respondents.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Mr El-Rufai is demanding N1 billion in damages against the ICPC and the others.
|
|
The other respondents are a chief magistrate of the Magistrates’ Court of the FCT, Abuja, the Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF).
The matter, which is before Judge Joyce Abdulmalik of the Federal High Court in Abuja, was called on Tuesday but could not proceed.
|
|
|
|---|
Only Mr El-Rufai, who is still in ICPC’s detention, had legal representation in court for the proceedings. Ubong Akpan appeared for the ex-governor. No lawyer represented the respondents.
Mr Akpan therefore informed the court that although the matter was scheduled for mention, his team had been unable to serve the respondents.
He sought an adjournment to take the necessary actions and Ms Abdulmalik fixed 11 March for further mention.
The former governor put forward seven prayers in the originating motion on notice, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026 and filed on 20 February.
NAN reports that Mr El-Rufai, through his team of lawyers led by Oluwole Iyamu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), urged court to declare that the search warrant issued on 4 February by a chief magistrate in Abuja, which authorised the search and seizure at his residence was invalid, null and void.
He asked the court to declare the search warrant “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.”
He prayed the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on 19 February at about 2 p.m. by the and ICPC and Inspector-General of Police amounts to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights.
He said it amounted to a violation to dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.”
He also urged the court to declare that “any evidence obtained pursuant to the aforesaid invalid warrant and unlawful search is inadmissible in any proceedings against the applicant as it was procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.”
Mr El-Rufai, therefore, sought an order of injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further relying on, using, or tendering any evidence or items seized during the unlawful search in any investigation, prosecution, or proceedings involving him.
He sought an order directing the ICPC and the inspector-general of police to forthwith retum all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together with a detailed inventory thereof.
He also sought an order awarding the N1 billion as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages.
Mr El-Rufai did the breakdown of the N1 billion in damages to include “a 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 the applicant’s rights.
“N300 million as aggravated damages for the malicious, high-handed and oppressive nature of the respondents’ actions, including the use of a patently defective warrant procured through misleading representations.”
He equally sought a N100 million as cost of filing the suit, including legal fees and associated expenses.
Grounds of application
In his grounds of argument, tMr El-Rufai’s lawyer argued that the search warrant was fundamentally defective, lacking specificity in the description of items to be seized, containing material typographical errors, ambiguous execution terms, overbroad directives, and no verifiable probable cause.
He said this was in contravention of Sections 143-148 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015; Section 36 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC) Act, 2000, and constitutional protections against arbitrary intrusions.
Specifically, Mr Iyamu argued that Section 143 of the ACJA requires that an application for a search warrant be supported by information in writing and on oath, setting forth reasonable grounds for suspicion, which was absent here as evidenced by the incomplete initiating clause;
He said Section 144 mandates particular descriptions of the place to be searched and the items sought, to prevent general warrants.
He, however, argued that the instant warrant vaguely referred to “the thing aforesaid” without any detail.
Mr Iyamu stated that the execution of the invalid warrant on Feb. 19 resulted in an unlawful invasion of his client’s premises, constituting violations of the rights to dignity (Section 34), personal liberty (Section 35), fair hearing (Section 36), and privacy (Section 37) of the Constitution.
He further argued that the search was conducted without legal justification and in a manner that inflicted humiliation and distress.
(NAN)
Discover more from Premium Times Nigeria
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
