A Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned to October 27, 2026, the hearing of a N1 billion fundamental rights lawsuit filed by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir el-Rufai against the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), the Inspector-General of Police (IGP), and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF).
Presiding Justice Joyce Abdulmalik granted the adjournment to allow el-Rufai’s legal team, led by Akinyemi Aremu, adequate time to respond to a counter-affidavit recently filed by the AGF, which strongly opposes the former governor’s claims.
During the session, counsel for the AGF, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, informed the court that her client had filed the counter-affidavit and sought leave to regularize its filing by extending the time within which it could be deemed properly served. Counsel representing the IGP and the ICPC raised no objections to the application, prompting Justice Abdulmalik to grant the request and set October 27 for a definite hearing.
The lawsuit stems from a controversial search of el-Rufai’s residence by anti-graft and police operatives. In his fundamental rights application, the former governor is seeking an injunction to restrain the respondents and their agents from relying on, using, or tendering any items or evidence seized during the search in any ongoing or future investigations or prosecutions involving him.
Furthermore, el-Rufai is demanding a court order compelling the ICPC and the IGP to return all items allegedly confiscated from his residence, alongside a comprehensive, itemized inventory of the seized properties. To underscore the alleged violation of his constitutional rights, he is claiming N1 billion in general, exemplary, and aggravated damages.
SEE ALSO: Atiku Demands Answers Over Tinubu’s Third Consecutive Absence From UN General Assembly
The respondents have firmly pushed back against these demands. In its counter-affidavit, the ICPC maintained that it acted entirely within its statutory mandate, having received a formal petition against el-Rufai that necessitated a legitimate investigation, which ultimately led to the search of his premises.
Notably, el-Rufai had initially included the Chief Magistrate of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Magistrates’ Court as a respondent in the suit. However, he voluntarily withdrew the magistrate’s name after the court observed that he could not specifically identify the judicial officer he intended to sue.
As the legal maneuvering continues, the October hearing will serve as a critical juncture in determining whether the court will scrutinize the procedural integrity of the anti-corruption agencies’ actions or uphold the state’s broad investigative powers. For now, the battle lines are drawn, pitting the formidable machinery of state investigation against the constitutional safeguards of a prominent political figure.
Promise Idoko is Junior Reporter working with moderncrux He covers global politics and international affairs. Based in Nigeria,
