…El-Rufai is asking the court to hold that the operation violated his rights to dignity, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy
ABUJA, NIGERIA- The iNews Times | Former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, has filed a ₦1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), accusing the agency of unlawfully invading and searching his Abuja residence.
The suit, numbered FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, was lodged at the Federal High Court in Abuja on February 20 by his counsel, Oluwole Iyamu (SAN). El-Rufai is challenging the legality of a search warrant reportedly issued on February 4 by a Chief Magistrate of the FCT Magistrates’ Court, contending that it is defective and should be nullified.
In his application, El-Rufai argued that the warrant lacked specificity, contained drafting errors, and featured ambiguous execution terms and an overly broad scope without probable cause. He maintained that these flaws rendered the search unconstitutional and in violation of Section 37 of the Constitution.
El-Rufai listed the ICPC as the first respondent, while the Chief Magistrate of the FCT Magistrates’ Court (Abuja Magisterial District), the Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney-General of the Federation were named as second to fourth respondents.
He is seeking seven reliefs, including a declaration that the February 19 search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, carried out around 2 p.m. by ICPC and police operatives, breached his fundamental rights.
Specifically, El-Rufai is asking the court to hold that the operation violated his rights to dignity, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy as guaranteed under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution. He also urged the court to rule that any evidence obtained through the disputed warrant is inadmissible in proceedings against him, on the grounds that it was secured in breach of constitutional protections.
Among other demands, El-Rufai is seeking an order restraining the respondents from using any items seized during the search for investigative or prosecutorial purposes. He further requested a directive compelling the ICPC and the Inspector-General of Police to immediately return all materials taken from his home, along with a comprehensive inventory.
Additionally, El-Rufai is claiming ₦1 billion in general, exemplary, and aggravated damages for alleged rights violations, including trespass, unlawful seizure, emotional trauma, humiliation, invasion of privacy, and reputational harm. He itemised the claim as ₦300 million for psychological and emotional distress, ₦400 million as exemplary damages to deter future misconduct by law enforcement agencies, and ₦300 million as aggravated damages for what he described as malicious and oppressive conduct. He also sought ₦100 million to cover legal fees and associated costs.
In his legal submissions, Iyamu argued that the warrant contravened Sections 143 to 148 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015, Section 36 of the ICPC Act, 2000, and constitutional safeguards against arbitrary intrusion.
He maintained that Section 143 of the ACJA requires written information on oath establishing reasonable suspicion before a warrant may be issued, a requirement he claimed was not met. He further stated that Section 144 mandates precise identification of the premises and items to be searched to avoid general warrants, but the contested warrant allegedly made only vague reference to “the thing aforesaid” without specific details.
According to him, Section 146 requires warrants to follow a prescribed format free from material defects, yet the document reportedly contained errors in the address, date, and district designation. He added that Section 147 restricts execution to designated persons, whereas the warrant was broadly addressed to “all officers,” and that Section 148’s requirement for reasonable execution timeframes was undermined by contradictory language in the document.
Iyamu argued that the February 19 execution of the warrant amounted to an unlawful invasion of his client’s residence and a violation of his constitutional rights. He cited judicial precedents, including C.O.P. v. Omoh (1969) NCLR 137 and Fawehinmi v. IGP (2000) 7 NWLR (Pt. 665) 481, to support his contention that improperly obtained evidence is inadmissible.
In a supporting affidavit, Mohammed Shaba, Principal Secretary to the former governor, stated that ICPC and police officers stormed the residence on February 19 under what he described as a defective warrant issued around February 4. He alleged that the warrant failed to specify the items sought and that due process was not followed during the search.
Shaba further claimed that officers confiscated personal documents and electronic devices, causing humiliation and emotional distress. He added that the seized items had yet to be returned and that the action was filed in good faith to safeguard the applicant’s constitutional rights.
