Due to the claimed illegal entry and search of his Abuja home, Nasir El-Rufai, a former governor of Kaduna State, has filed a N1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Commission.
In the lawsuit filed on February 20 at the Federal High Court in Abuja by his attorney, Oluwole Iyamu (SAN), with the filing number FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, El-Rufai is contesting the legality of a search warrant that was issued on February 4 by a Chief Magistrate of the FCT Magistrates’ Court.
He is requesting that the court rule that the warrant that permitted the search and seizure at his home was void.
The former governor claimed in the application that the 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 Inspector-General of Police, the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Chief Magistrate of the FCT Magistrates’ Court, Abuja Magisterial District, and the ICPC were nominated as the first, second, and fourth respondents, respectively, by El-Rufai.
One of the seven reliefs he is requesting is a declaration that his fundamental rights were violated by the alleged invasion and search of his home at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on February 19 at approximately 2:00 p.m. by ICPC and Nigeria Police Force agents acting under the contested warrant.
He specifically sought the court to rule that the search “amounts to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights to privacy, personal liberty, fair hearing, and dignity of the human person under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.”
Additionally, he asked the court to rule that “any evidence obtained pursuant to the aforementioned invalid warrant and unlawful search is inadmissible in any proceedings against the applicant, as it was procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.”
In addition to other prayers, El-Rufai is requesting an injunction prohibiting the respondents from using or presenting any objects found during the search in any inquiry or legal action against him.
In addition, he requested “an order directing the first and third respondents (ICPC and I-G) to forthwith return all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together with a detailed inventory thereof.”
Furthermore, he is seeking “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.”
The former governor separated the N1 billion claim into three parts: N400 million for exemplary damages to prevent future misconduct by law enforcement, N300 million for compensatory damages for psychological trauma and emotional distress, and N300 million for aggravated damages for what he called the oppressive and malicious nature of the respondents’ actions.
In addition, he wanted N100 million to compensate legal fees and other related costs for the suit’s filing.
Iyamu argued that the warrant had several serious flaws, including vague instructions, unclear execution terms, too general instructions, a lack of verifiable probable cause, and a vague description of the objects to be seized.
He claimed that the purported flaws violated the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015’s Sections 143 to 148, the ICPC Act, 2000’s Section 36, and the constitution’s safeguards against arbitrary interference.
“Section 143 of the ACJA requires that an application for a search warrant be supported by information in writing and on oath, setting forth reasonable grounds for suspicion,” he claimed, and this was not the case in this instance.
He went on to say that in order to avoid generic warrants, Section 144 requires precise descriptions of the location to be searched and the objects sought, but the warrant in question only included a vague reference to “the thing aforesaid.”
Furthermore, he argued that “the warrant is rife with errors in the address, date, and district designation, despite Section 146 requiring that it be in the prescribed form, free from defects that could mislead.”
Although Section 147 permits instructions to be given to designated individuals, the warrant’s indiscriminate reference to “all officers” is excessively wide and unaccountable.
“Section 148 permits execution at reasonable times, but the contradictory language undermines procedural clarity by creating ambiguity.”
Iyamu claimed that his client’s constitutional rights were infringed and that the warrant’s execution on February 19 led to an illegal invasion of his property.
He supported his claim that evidence gathered improperly is inadmissible by citing resolved decisions such as C.O.P. v. Omoh (1969) NCLR 137 and Fawehinmi v. IGP (2000) 7 NWLR (Pt. 665) 481.
Mohammed Shaba, a former governor’s principal secretary, testified in support of the application that on February 19, officials from the Nigeria Police Force and the ICPC burst into the house using what he claimed was a faulty warrant that had been granted on or around February 4.
He claimed that the police disregarded procedural requirements prior to conducting the search and that the “search warrant did not specify the properties or items being searched for.”
Shaba went on to say that authorities reportedly caused “undue humiliation, psychological trauma, and distress” by seizing personal documents and electronic devices during the raid.
He further stated that the application was made in good faith to uphold the applicant’s fundamental rights and that none of the confiscated goods had been restored.
Hon. Dr. Philip “Okanga” Agbese, a transformative leader in Enone. Discover his achievements, community projects, and vision for 2027
