A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai seeking to restrain the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and other security agencies from freezing his bank accounts and interfering with his properties.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, who delivered the judgment on Thursday, held that the suit amounted to an abuse of court process, noting that El-Rufai had instituted a similar action before the Federal Capital Territory High Court.
The court also ruled that the suit was speculative and failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), the Department of State Services (DSS) and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF).
Consequently, the court struck out the names of the three respondents from the suit.
El-Rufai had approached the court in a suit dated February 23 and filed on February 24, 2026, seeking an interim injunction directing the respondents to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the matter.
The former governor argued that his severance benefits, which he received after completing his tenure between 2015 and 2023, could not reasonably be suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.
He also sought a declaration that properties acquired with the funds were lawfully obtained and belonged to him.
The suit named several bank accounts operated by El-Rufai with Zenith Bank, Guaranty Trust Bank and Access Bank, including naira and domiciliary accounts.
He further asked the court to restrain the respondents from applying for or executing interim or final forfeiture orders, freezing his accounts or seizing his properties without first establishing reasonable suspicion supported by credible evidence as required by law.
Citing Section 17(1) of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Related Offences Act, 2006, and the Supreme Court decision in Melrose General Services Ltd v. EFCC, El-Rufai argued that he was entitled to the presumption of innocence and the protection of his fundamental rights.
He maintained that attempts to obtain forfeiture or freezing orders through ex-parte applications that concealed material facts would violate his constitutional right to fair hearing under Section 36(5) of the Constitution.
The former governor consequently sought a perpetual injunction preventing the respondents from freezing, attaching, seizing or forfeiting his assets and bank accounts.
He also demanded N1 billion in general, exemplary and aggravated damages, alleging that the threatened actions could cause psychological distress, anxiety and reputational damage.
Additionally, he sought N100 million as costs of the action, including legal fees and related expenses.
However, the ICPC challenged the suit through a preliminary objection filed by its counsel, Abdul Mohammed, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, asking the court to dismiss the case for being incompetent and an abuse of court process.
The commission argued that El-Rufai’s arrest, the search of his residence and the investigation into his assets arose from a single, ongoing criminal investigation.
It accused the former governor of fragmenting his grievances by filing three related suits across two court hierarchies within 12 days, rather than consolidating his claims into one action.
According to the commission, El-Rufai had also filed suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026 at the Federal High Court on February 20, 2026, challenging the search warrant and alleging violations of his fundamental rights.
It further identified suit No. FCT/HC/CV/950/2026, filed at the FCT High Court on March 3, 2026, in which the former governor challenged his remand order and raised issues relating to his fundamental rights.
The ICPC argued that the multiple suits sought overlapping monetary and injunctive reliefs against the same law enforcement agency, creating the risk of conflicting judgments.
The DSS, through its counsel, Ayodeji Adedipe, also a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, urged the court to strike out the suit for being incompetent and for failing to establish a reasonable cause of action against the service.
Similarly, the Attorney-General of the Federation, represented by the Director of Civil Litigation and Public Law, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, argued that the allegations in El-Rufai’s affidavit were speculative.
The AGF’s representative maintained that interim forfeiture orders were investigative measures and did not amount to final forfeiture or automatically violate the former governor’s rights.
She further argued that law enforcement agencies were legally empowered to approach courts for forfeiture orders in the course of their investigations.
The respondents urged the court to dismiss the suit, citing the related proceedings already instituted by El-Rufai before other courts.
In her judgment, Justice Abdulmalik agreed with the respondents that the suit constituted an abuse of court process because of the similar action pending before the FCT High Court.
The judge also held that courts could not be used to prevent law enforcement agencies from carrying out their statutory responsibilities.
