By Taiye Agbaje
Former Gov. Nasir El-Rufai of Kaduna State has filed a N1 billion fundamental
rights enforcement suit against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other
Related Enforcement Commission (ICPC) over alleged unlawful invasion of his
Abuja residence.
El-Rufai, through his team of lawyers led by Oluwole Iyamu, SAN, prayed the
court to declare that the search warrant issued on Feb. 4 by the Chief Magistrate,
Magistrate’s Court of the FCT (2nd respondent), authorising the search and seizure
at his residence was invalid, null and void.
He urged the court to declare that the search warrant was “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.”
The former governor in the originating motion on notice marked:
FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, sued ICPC as 1st respondent.
El-Rufai named the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT, Abuja
Magisterial District; I-G and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as 2nd to
4th respondents respectively.
In the suit dated and filed Feb. 20 by Iyamu, the detained ex-governor sought
seven reliefs.
He prayed the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence at
House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on Feb. 19 at about 2pm and
executed by agents of ICPC and I-G, “under the aforesaid invalid warrant, amounts
to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights to dignity of the human
person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37
of the Constitution.”
El-Rufai 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.”
He 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.
“An order directing the Ist and 3rd respondents (ICPC and I-G) to forthwith retum
all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together
with a detailed inventory thereof.
“An order awarding the sum of N1,000,000,000.00 (One Billion Naira) as general,
exemplary, and aggravated damages against the respondents jointly and severally
for the violations of the applicant’s fundamental rights, including trespass,
unlawful seizure, and the resultant psychological trauma, humiliation, distress,
infringement of privacy, and reputational harm.”
According to El-Rufai, the breakdown of the N1 billion in damages include “a
N300 million as compensatory damages for psychological trauma, emotional
distress, and loss of personal security;
A N400 million as exemplary damages to deter future misconduct by law
enforcement agencies and vindicate the applicant’s rights.
A 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.
He equally gave a plethora of cases to back his argument.
In the affidavit in support of the application, Mohammed Shaba, a Principal
Secretary to the former governor, averred that on Feb. 19 at about 2p.m., officers
from the ICPC and Nigeria Police Force invaded the residence under a purported
search warrant issued on or about Feb. 4.
According to him, the said warrant is invalid due to its lack of specificity, errors,
and other defects as outlined in the grounds of this application.
He said the “search warrant did not specify the properties or items being searched
for.”
Shaba stated that the officers failed to submit themselves for search as provided by
the law before proceeding with the search.
“That the Magistrate did not specify the magisterial district wherein he sits.
“That during the invasion, the officers searched the applicant’s premises without
lawful authority, seized personal items including documents and electronic devices,
and caused the applicant undue humiliation, psychological trauma, and distress.
“Now shown to me and marked as ‘EXHIBIT B’ Is the list of the items carted
away.
“That no items seized have been returned, and the respondents continue to rely on
the unlawful evidence.
“That the applicant suffered violations of his constitutional rights as a result, and
this application is brought in good faith to enforce same,” Shaba said.
