The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a fundamental rights suit filed by former Kaduna State Governor, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai, seeking to restrain the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Department of State Services (DSS), the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and other authorities from freezing his bank accounts or seizing his assets.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, in a judgment delivered on Thursday, October 8, held that the suit constituted an abuse of court process, agreeing with the respondents that El-Rufai had instituted similar proceedings before the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court and the Federal High Court.
The judge also described the action as speculative and lacking in merit, stressing that the courts could not be used to prevent law enforcement agencies from carrying out their statutory responsibilities.
She further held that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the EFCC, DSS and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, and consequently struck out their names as respondents.
The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/368/2026, was filed on February 24, 2026, by El-Rufai’s counsel, Oluwole Iyamu, SAN.
The former governor had asked the court to restrain the respondents from taking steps to freeze his bank accounts, seize his properties or initiate forfeiture proceedings against his assets pending the determination of the substantive suit.
He also sought an interim injunction directing the agencies to maintain the status quo to prevent what he described as a fait accompli – an irreversible action that could render the eventual determination of the case ineffective.
El-Rufai argued that the severance benefits he received after completing his tenure as Kaduna State governor between 2015 and 2023 could not reasonably be suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity.
He consequently asked the court to declare that the funds were lawfully received and that properties acquired with the money were legally owned by him.
The former governor also sought a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from freezing, attaching, seizing, forfeiting or otherwise interfering with his properties and bank accounts.
Reports on the suit identified accounts held with Zenith Bank, Guaranty Trust Bank and Access Bank among the financial assets he sought to protect.
In addition, El-Rufai demanded ₦1 billion in general, exemplary and aggravated damages, citing the anticipated violation of his fundamental rights, psychological trauma, distress, anxiety and reputational harm allegedly arising from the threat of unlawful forfeiture proceedings.
He also sought ₦100 million as costs of the action, including legal fees and associated expenses.
ICPC alleges abuse of court process
In opposing the suit, the ICPC urged the court to dismiss it, describing the action as incompetent and an abuse of court process.
The commission argued that El-Rufai’s arrest, the search of his residence and the anticipated tracing and freezing of his assets arose from a single, ongoing criminal investigation.
According to the ICPC, the former governor had fragmented his complaints into three separate suits filed before two different court hierarchies, creating the possibility of conflicting judgments from courts of coordinate jurisdiction.
The commission cited an earlier suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, filed at the Federal High Court on February 20, 2026, in which El-Rufai challenged a search warrant and sought the enforcement of his fundamental rights.
It also referred to another case, marked FCT/HC/CV/950/2026, filed at the FCT High Court on March 3, 2026, challenging his remand and seeking additional reliefs concerning his fundamental rights.
The ICPC maintained that the overlapping cases arose from related aspects of the same investigation and should not be pursued through separate proceedings in different courts.
The DSS also urged the court to strike out the suit, arguing that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the service.
Similarly, the AGF opposed El-Rufai’s claims, arguing that the reliefs sought were speculative. The government’s representative, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, Director of Civil Litigation and Public Law, submitted that an interim forfeiture order was not the same as a final forfeiture order.
She argued that an interim order could enable an investigating agency to continue its investigation and that the ICPC, EFCC and DSS were empowered to approach courts of competent jurisdiction for forfeiture orders in the course of their investigations.
The judgment represents a setback for El-Rufai’s attempt to obtain a court order preventing the agencies from pursuing potential asset-freezing or forfeiture measures connected with their investigation.
However, the dismissal of the suit does not, by itself, establish that the former governor’s assets are proceeds of criminal activity, nor does it amount to an order forfeiting his properties to the Federal Government.
Any actual freezing, seizure or forfeiture of assets remains subject to the applicable legal procedures and the orders of a court with jurisdiction.
The immediate issue before Justice Abdulmalik was whether El-Rufai’s action seeking to prevent anticipated measures against his assets could be sustained in view of the other proceedings he had instituted.
The latest judgment comes amid other legal disputes between El-Rufai and law enforcement authorities over the investigation, the search of his Abuja residence and his fundamental rights.
In a separate suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, the former governor challenged the validity of a search warrant used to search his residence and sought the return of items allegedly seized during the operation.
That separate fundamental rights case, in which he also sought ₦1 billion in damages against the ICPC, the Inspector-General of Police and the AGF, was adjourned by Justice Abdulmalik to October 27, 2026, for definite hearing.
The pending case is separate from the asset-related suit dismissed on October 8.