A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir el-Rufai seeking to restrain the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and other agencies from freezing his bank accounts or seizing his assets.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik dismissed the suit on Thursday, ruling 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 the first to fourth respondents, respectively.

The judge upheld the respondents’ argument that the former governor had instituted similar suits before the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court and the Federal High Court.

She also held that the court could not be used to prevent law enforcement agencies from performing their statutory duties, describing the suit as speculative and lacking in merit.

Abdulmalik further ruled that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action against the EFCC, DSS and AGF, consequently striking out their names as respondents.

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/368/2026, was filed on February 24 by el-Rufai’s counsel, Oluwole Iyamu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

The former governor 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, or an irreversible action.

El-Rufai argued that the severance pay he received after his tenure as governor between 2015 and 2023 could not reasonably be suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activity.

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

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

Additionally, he demanded N1 billion in general, exemplary and aggravated damages over 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.

In its preliminary objection, the ICPC urged 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.

According to the ICPC, the former governor had fragmented his claims by filing three separate suits before two different court hierarchies within 12 days.

The commission said el-Rufai filed suit FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026 at the Federal High Court on February 20, challenging the search warrant and seeking the enforcement of his fundamental rights.

It added that he subsequently filed another 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 ICPC maintained 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 on the grounds that it was incompetent and failed to disclose any reasonable cause of action against the service.

Similarly, the AGF argued in his counter-affidavit that the office of the attorney-general was a necessary party only 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 explained that an interim forfeiture order was not a final forfeiture order but a measure that could enable the ICPC to continue its investigation.

She argued that an application for an interim forfeiture order did not, in 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 during their investigations.

The AGF’s representative consequently 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.