Nollywood actor, Emeka Ike, said his N10bn suit against Lere Olayinka, an aide to FCT Minister Nyesom Wike, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), was aimed at protecting Nigerians’ privacy rights.
In this interview with Justina SIMON of NEWSNGR, Ike speaks on his disappointment with the Federal High Court’s dismissal of the suit, the possibility of an appeal and his political future. EXCERPTS:
The Federal High Court Dismissed Your N10bn Suit Against Lere Olayinka And INEC. What’s Your Reaction To The Judgment?
I respect the authority of the court and the judicial process, but I am disappointed with the outcome. I believe that the issues which brought me to court are important, not just to me personally, but to every Nigerian whose personal information is held by public institutions.
My intention was never to ridicule anybody or use the court to settle a political score. I only approached the court because I believed that my privacy and personal data deserved legal protection. I will study the judgment carefully with my legal team and determine the appropriate next step in accordance with the law.
This matter is bigger than Emeka Ike.
It concerns the protection of citizens’ personal information and the responsibility that comes with access to such information. No wonder Nigerians decried it, and it raised a big uproar and serious concern among Nigerians.
The Court Ruled That Your Suit Was Incompetent And Improperly Constituted, And Dismissed It For Lack Of Proof. Do You Agree With The Findings?
With due respect to the court, I do not necessarily agree with every conclusion reached in the judgment. However, I recognise that the court has given its decision, and I must respond through the legal process rather than through confrontation or public attacks.
The court raised important questions about the procedure used to bring the action, the nature of the dispute, and whether the evidence established the claims made. These are matters that my legal team will examine carefully.
My understanding is that the court considered the fundamental rights enforcement procedure inappropriate for a dispute involving contested facts and also found that the evidence did not establish the required breach of duty, injury and entitlement to damages.
If there are sustainable grounds for challenging those findings, the law provides a process for doing so. I believe in the rule of law, and I intend to approach this matter on that basis.
So we can be sure what this judgment is saying. Are Nigerians willing to accept such fate if under the same circumstances?
Do You Intend To Appeal The Judgment? If So, Which Aspects Of The Ruling Will You Challenge?
My legal team will carefully review the certified judgment and advise me on the appropriate course of action. I do not want to announce a decision on appeal before that review is completed.
However, the issues we will examine include the court’s finding that the action was incompetent, its conclusion that the fundamental rights procedure was inappropriate, and its assessment of the evidence concerning the alleged publication and protection of my personal data.
We will also examine the court’s reasoning on the applicable data protection law, the alleged duties of the respondents and the legal basis for the reliefs I sought.
If the judgment discloses sustainable grounds of appeal, I will consider exercising my right of appeal within the time prescribed by law. My objective is to pursue justice through the proper legal channels, as a sustainable institutional legacy for Nigerians.
Do You Still Believe Your Right To Privacy And Data Protection Was Violated?
Yes. I maintain that the circumstances surrounding the publication of my voter registration information raised serious questions about privacy and the handling of personal data. That was why I sought judicial intervention.
However, I acknowledge that the court did not accept my claim as established on the evidence and procedure before it. I will not misrepresent the judgment or pretend that the court found in my favour.
My concern remains that the fact that some information may be accessible for a legitimate electoral purpose should not automatically be taken to mean that every form of collection, disclosure, circulation or use of that information is lawful in every circumstance.
The real question is whether personal information is accessed, handled and published in accordance with the law and for a lawful purpose. That question deserves serious attention, and I believe Nigerians should be able to seek appropriate legal remedies where they believe their rights have been infringed.
INEC Claimed The Information Was Not Confidential And Did Not Originate From Its Database. What Evidence Did You Present To Support Your Allegations?
My case was based on the publication complained of, the information displayed, the circumstances surrounding its circulation, and the materials placed before the court. We also relied on the legal obligations concerning privacy and personal data protection.
INEC disputed liability and maintained that there had been no external breach of its database. The respondents also contested the confidentiality of the information and the legal responsibility attributed to them.
The court ultimately found that the evidence before it did not establish the claims to the required legal standard. I respect that finding as the outcome of the proceedings.
Nevertheless, the question of who originally accessed or supplied the information, the circumstances in which it was obtained, and whether its subsequent publication complied with applicable law are matters that must be assessed on reliable evidence, not assumptions.
I will allow my legal team to examine the judgment and the evidence on record before making any further legal assertions.
Do You See The Court’s Decision Affecting Your Political Aspirations?
My interest in public service goes beyond one party primary or one court case. I was interested in representing the people of AMAC/Bwari Federal Constituency because I believe public office should be about service, accountability and the welfare of the people.
Although I did not secure the party ticket, that experience has not removed my interest in contributing to society.
I will continue to assess the political environment, engage with people and explore lawful opportunities to serve.
I would not say that this judgment determines my political future. The court case concerned privacy and data protection; my political aspirations concern public service. They are separate matters.
I remain committed to the rule of law, responsible political participation and the protection of the rights of ordinary Nigerians. Whatever direction I take next, I want it to be guided by service rather than personal bitterness.
