A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir el-Rufai seeking to prevent the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and other security agencies from freezing his bank accounts or seizing his assets.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik dismissed the suit on Thursday, ruling that it amounted to an abuse of court process because similar cases had already been instituted before other courts.
El-Rufai had filed the action against the ICPC, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Department of State Services (DSS) and the Attorney-General of the Federation.
The judge agreed with the respondents that the former governor had instituted similar suits at the Federal Capital Territory High Court and the Federal High Court.
Abdulmalik also held that the court could not be used to prevent law enforcement agencies from carrying out their statutory responsibilities. She described the suit as speculative and lacking in merit.
The judge subsequently struck out the names of the EFCC, DSS and the Attorney-General of the Federation as respondents, holding that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action against them.
The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/368/2026, was filed on February 24 by el-Rufai’s counsel, Oluwole Iyamu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria.
In the suit, the former governor asked the court to restrain the respondents from freezing his bank accounts or seizing his assets pending the determination of the substantive case.
He also sought an interim injunction directing the agencies to maintain the status quo to prevent what he described as a fait accompli, or an irreversible action.
El-Rufai argued that the severance benefits he received after leaving office, having served as governor between 2015 and 2023, could not reasonably be suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity.
He also asked the court to declare that properties acquired with the severance pay were lawfully purchased and belonged to him.
In addition, he sought a perpetual injunction preventing the respondents from freezing, attaching, seizing, forfeiting or otherwise interfering with his properties and bank accounts.
The former governor also demanded N1bn in general, exemplary and aggravated damages over the alleged threat to his fundamental rights, psychological trauma, distress, anxiety and reputational harm arising from the anticipated forfeiture proceedings.
He further requested N100m as costs of the action, including legal fees and related expenses.
ICPC cites multiple suits
In its preliminary objection, the ICPC urged the court to dismiss the case, describing it as incompetent and an abuse of court process.
The commission argued that the issues surrounding 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 improperly divided his claims among three separate suits filed before two different court hierarchies within 12 days.
The commission identified one of the cases as FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, which el-Rufai filed at the Federal High Court on February 20 to challenge a search warrant and seek the enforcement of his fundamental rights.
It also cited suit number FCT/HC/CV/950/2026, filed at the FCT High Court on March 3, in which the former governor challenged a remand order and sought the enforcement of his fundamental rights.
The ICPC maintained that pursuing overlapping cases before different courts could result in conflicting decisions.
The DSS also asked the court to strike out the suit, arguing that it was incompetent and failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action against the service.
AGF opposes el-Rufai’s claims
The Attorney-General of the Federation, in a counter-affidavit, argued that the office should only be joined as a necessary party in cases directly involving the Federal Government.
The AGF’s representative, Maimuna Lami-Shiru, Director of Civil Litigation and Public Law, described the depositions in el-Rufai’s affidavit as speculative.
She also argued that an interim forfeiture order was not the same as a final forfeiture order, explaining that it could be used to allow the ICPC to continue its investigation.
According to her, an application for an interim forfeiture order did not, by itself, violate the former governor’s rights.
Lami-Shiru added that the ICPC, EFCC and DSS were legally empowered to approach courts of competent jurisdiction for forfeiture orders during investigations.
She consequently urged the court to dismiss the suit, noting that el-Rufai had filed similar cases before both the FCT High Court and the Federal High Court.
