El-Rufai’s Fundamental Rights Suit Against ICPC Adjourned

A Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned until March 25 a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and three other respondents.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik granted the adjournment on Wednesday to allow parties to regularise their court processes. The judge also ordered that hearing notices be served on the 2nd respondent, the Chief Magistrate of the FCT, and the 4th respondent, the Attorney-General of the Federation, who were not represented in court.

El-Rufai is seeking N1 billion in damages, claiming that a search of his Abuja residence on February 19 by ICPC operatives and police officers violated his constitutional rights to dignity, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy. He argues the search was conducted under an invalid warrant and seeks to have any evidence obtained declared inadmissible. His originating motion also requests the return of all seized items and an injunction preventing the respondents from using the evidence in any proceedings against him.

The ICPC, in its counter-affidavit, defended the operation, stating it acted on a valid search warrant issued on February 18 and executed the following day. The commission said the search, which was witnessed by El-Rufai’s wife and son, was part of an investigation following a petition. It urged the court to dismiss the suit.

Similarly, the Nigeria Police Force, through a counter-affidavit, asserted its statutory authority to investigate and prosecute. The police maintained the search warrant was genuine and that its officers complied with all legal procedures. They accused El-Rufai of attempting to use the court to obstruct a lawful security investigation and prosecution, and also prayed for the suit’s dismissal.

The case, filed on February 20, has been adjourned for a full hearing on March 25, with all parties expected to have completed their filings. The suit highlights the legal tension between investigative powers and individual rights, particularly concerning high-profile figures. The court’s eventual ruling will address the validity of the search warrant and the admissibility of evidence obtained in its execution.