Court Rejects El-Rufai’s Bid to Shield Bank Accounts From Freezing

BY TAIBAT UMMI YAKUBU

A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai seeking to stop anti-corruption agencies from freezing his bank accounts or seizing his assets, ruling that the case amounted to an abuse of court process.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik delivered the judgment on Thursday, agreeing with the arguments of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and other respondents that El-Rufai had filed a similar case before another court.

The suit named the ICPC, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), Department of State Services (DSS) and Attorney-General of the Federation as respondents.

The judge held that the case was speculative and lacked merit, adding that citizens could not use the courts to prevent law enforcement agencies from carrying out their legally assigned duties.

She also ruled that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the EFCC, DSS and the Attorney-General of the Federation, ordering that their names be struck out.

El-Rufai had approached the court seeking an injunction to prevent the agencies from freezing his bank accounts, attaching his properties or pursuing forfeiture proceedings while the substantive suit was pending.

He argued that the severance benefits he received after serving as Kaduna governor from 2015 to 2023 were legitimate and could not reasonably be regarded as proceeds of unlawful activity.

The former governor also sought a declaration that properties acquired with the money were lawfully owned by him. He maintained that any attempt to freeze or seize his assets without credible evidence establishing reasonable suspicion would violate his constitutional rights.

Advertisement

In addition, El-Rufai asked the court to restrain the respondents from taking steps against his accounts and properties and demanded N1 billion in general, exemplary and aggravated damages. He also sought N100 million in legal costs and other expenses.

However, the ICPC challenged the suit, arguing that it was part of a series of overlapping cases filed by the former governor over the same ongoing investigation.

In its preliminary objection, the commission said El-Rufai had instituted three related suits within 12 days across the Federal High Court and the FCT High Court, seeking similar reliefs against law enforcement agencies.

The commission identified one case filed on February 20, 2026, at the Federal High Court, Abuja, challenging a search warrant and alleging violations of his fundamental rights. It also cited another suit filed on March 3, 2026, at the FCT High Court over a remand order and the enforcement of fundamental rights.

According to the ICPC, pursuing overlapping cases before different courts risked producing conflicting judgments and unnecessarily burdening the judicial system.

The commission argued that the former governor should have presented his grievances in a single, comprehensive action instead of pursuing parallel proceedings.

The DSS also urged the court to strike out the case, arguing that it was incompetent and failed to establish a reasonable cause of action against the service.

Similarly, the Attorney-General of the Federation’s office maintained that El-Rufai’s claims were speculative and that an interim forfeiture order did not amount to a final determination that assets were unlawfully acquired.

The government’s representative argued that law enforcement agencies were legally empowered to apply to competent courts for forfeiture orders during investigations, adding that such applications did not automatically constitute a violation of the former governor’s rights.

The court’s decision dismisses El-Rufai’s attempt in this particular suit to secure a blanket injunction against the freezing or seizure of his bank accounts and assets. The ruling, however, arose from the court’s finding that the case was an abuse of process and should not, on its own, be interpreted as a final determination of whether the former governor’s assets were lawfully acquired.