Court dismisses el-Rufai’s suit seeking to stop ICPC from freezing his bank accounts

 A federal high court in Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by Nasir el-Rufai, former governor of Kaduna, seeking to stop the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and other agencies from freezing his bank accounts or seizing his assets.

 

Joyce Abdulmalik, the presiding judge, dismissed the suit on Thursday after holding that it constituted an abuse of court process.

 

El-Rufai had sued the ICPC, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Department of State Services (DSS) and the attorney-general of the federation (AGF) as first to fourth respondents, respectively.

 

The judge agreed with the respondents that el-Rufai had instituted similar suits before the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) high court and the federal high court.

 

 

She also held that a court could not be used to prevent law enforcement agencies from carrying out their statutory duties.

 

Abdulmalik described el-Rufai’s suit as speculative and lacking in merit.

 

The judge further held that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the EFCC, DSS and AGF and consequently struck out their names as respondents.

 

 

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/368/2026, was filed on February 24 by Oluwole Iyamu, a senior advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

 

El-Rufai had asked the court to restrain the respondents from taking steps to freeze his bank accounts or seize his assets pending the determination of the substantive suit.

 

He also sought an interim injunction directing the respondents to maintain the status quo to prevent a fait accompli (an irreversible action).

 

The former governor argued that the severance pay received after his tenure between 2015 and 2023 could not reasonably be suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity.

 

 

He also asked the court to declare that properties purchased with the severance pay were lawfully acquired and owned by him.

 

El-Rufai sought a perpetual injunction restraining the respondents from freezing, attaching, seizing, forfeiting or otherwise interfering with his properties and bank accounts.

 

He also asked for N1 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 further sought N100 million as costs of the action, including legal fees and associated expenses.

 

 

ICPC CITES THREE SUITS

In its preliminary objection, the ICPC prayed the court to dismiss the suit, describing it as incompetent and a gross 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.

 

The ICPC said the former governor had instead fragmented his claims by filing three separate suits before two different court hierarchies within 12 days.

 

 

According to the commission, el-Rufai had filed suit FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026 at the federal high court on February 20, challenging the search warrant and seeking enforcement of his fundamental rights.

 

The ICPC said he subsequently filed suit, marked FCT/HC/CV/950/2026, at the FCT high court on March 3, challenging a remand order and seeking the enforcement of his fundamental rights.

 

 

The commission argued that the overlapping suits created a risk of conflicting decisions by courts of coordinate jurisdiction.

 

The DSS also urged the court to strike out the suit for being incompetent and its name from the case for failure to disclose any reasonable cause of action against the service.

 

The AGF, in his counter-affidavit, argued that the office of the attorney-general was only a necessary party in suits directly involving the federal government.

 

The AGF’s representative, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, director of civil litigation and public law, also described the depositions in el-Rufai’s affidavit as speculative.

 

Lami-Shiru argued that an interim forfeiture order was not a final forfeiture order but a measure that could enable the ICPC to continue its investigation.

 

She said an application for an interim forfeiture order did not, by itself, violate el-Rufai’s rights, adding that the ICPC, EFCC and DSS were empowered to apply to a court of competent jurisdiction for forfeiture orders in the course of their investigations.

 

The AGF’s representative urged the court to dismiss the suit, noting that el-Rufai had filed similar cases before the FCT high court and the federal high court.