Former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, has filed a N1 billion fundamental rights enforcement action against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission over what he described as an unlawful invasion and search of his Abuja residence.
In the suit, El-Rufai, through his legal team led by Oluwole Iyamu, SAN, is asking the court to invalidate the search warrant issued on February 4 by the Chief Magistrate of the Magistrate’s Court of the FCT.
He contends that the warrant, which authorised the search and seizure at his home, is defective and legally untenable.
The former governor is seeking a declaration 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.”
According to court documents marked FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, El-Rufai listed the ICPC as the first respondent. He also joined the Chief Magistrate of the FCT Magistrate’s Court, the Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney-General of the Federation as second to fourth respondents respectively.
In the originating motion filed on February 20, the former governor is seeking seven reliefs. He wants the court to declare that the February 19 search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, carried out at about 2 p.m. by agents of the ICPC and the Nigeria Police under the disputed warrant, amounted to a violation of his constitutional rights.
Specifically, he argued that the action infringed on his rights to dignity, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy as enshrined in Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.
He also asked the court to rule that any material obtained during the operation is inadmissible in any proceedings against him on the grounds that it was secured in breach of constitutional protections.
El-Rufai further sought an order restraining the respondents from relying on or presenting any items seized during the search in the course of investigations or prosecution. He asked for a directive compelling the ICPC and the Inspector-General of Police to immediately return all items taken from his residence, along with a detailed inventory.
The former governor is claiming N1 billion as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages for what he described as trespass, unlawful seizure, psychological trauma, humiliation, reputational harm, and infringement of privacy.
He broke down the damages to include N300 million as compensatory damages for emotional distress and loss of personal security; N400 million as exemplary damages intended to deter similar conduct by law enforcement agencies; and N300 million as aggravated damages for what he termed malicious and oppressive actions, including reliance on a defective warrant allegedly obtained through misleading representations.
Additionally, he is requesting N100 million to cover legal fees and other costs associated with filing the suit.
In his legal arguments, Iyamu maintained that the search warrant was fundamentally flawed, citing its lack of specificity regarding items to be seized, typographical errors, vague execution terms, overly broad directives, and absence of verifiable probable cause.
He argued that these defects contravened Sections 143 to 148 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act, 2015, as well as Section 36 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act, 2000, and constitutional safeguards against arbitrary searches.
According to him, Section 143 of the ACJA requires that an application for a search warrant be supported by sworn written information establishing reasonable grounds for suspicion, which he claimed was missing in this instance.
He further argued that Section 144 mandates detailed descriptions of both the premises to be searched and the items sought, to prevent general warrants, but that the document in question vaguely referred to “the thing aforesaid” without specific details.
Iyamu contended that the warrant was riddled with errors relating to address, date, and district designation, contrary to Section 146 of the ACJA, and that its broad address to “all officers” under Section 147 rendered it unaccountable. He also said the language regarding execution time created ambiguity in violation of Section 148.
The lawyer cited judicial precedents, including C.O.P. v. Omoh (1969) and Fawehinmi v. IGP (2000), to support the argument that evidence obtained through improper or vague warrants is inadmissible.
In an affidavit supporting the application, Mohammed Shaba, described as a Principal Secretary to the former governor, stated that officers from the ICPC and the Nigeria Police Force entered the residence under what he called a defective warrant.
He claimed the warrant did not clearly state the items being sought and that officers failed to submit themselves for search as required by law before carrying out the operation.
Shaba alleged that during the search, officers seized personal documents and electronic devices, causing humiliation and emotional distress, and that none of the items taken have been returned.
He maintained that the application was brought in good faith to enforce El-Rufai’s constitutional rights.
What You Should Know
Nasir El-Rufai has filed a N1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the ICPC and other respondents over the February 19 search of his Abuja residence.
He argues that the search warrant was defective and unconstitutional, seeks the return of seized items, and is asking the court to declare any evidence obtained inadmissible while awarding damages for alleged rights violations.
