El-Rufai Withdraws N1bn Human Rights Suit Against Abuja Magistrate
Former Kaduna state Governor Nasir El-Rufai has officially withdrawn his fundamental rights enforcement suit against a chief magistrate who was listed as the second defendant in his N1 billion case before the Federal High Court in Abuja. This significant legal development marks a pivotal shift in the high-profile human rights litigation that has captured national attention.
Legal Withdrawal and Court Proceedings
The decision to drop the case against the magistrate was formally communicated by El-Rufai's legal representative, Ugochukwu Nnakwu, during a court session before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik. Nnakwu informed the court that a motion had been filed specifically to strike out the magistrate's name from the suit, citing procedural grounds.
"We urge my lord to strike out the name of the second defendant as a party in this suit," Nnakwu stated emphatically during the hearing. This withdrawal followed Justice Abdulmalik's earlier observation that the case had failed to clearly identify the magistrate being sued, creating ambiguity in the legal proceedings.
Court Ruling and Legal Objections
In a brief but decisive ruling, Justice Abdulmalik granted the application and struck out the magistrate's name from the suit. The judge also removed the related motion that had been filed earlier in the case. However, the proceedings took an unexpected turn when El-Rufai's counsel requested additional time to amend the suit.
ICPC lawyer Abdul Mohammed immediately objected to this request, arguing forcefully that the removal of the magistrate effectively leaves no substantive case before the court. "The foundation of this suit has been fundamentally altered," Mohammed contended during the heated exchange.
Justice Abdulmalik responded to the objection by stating: "Counsel, you are jumping the gun. You can respond to this by filing a counteraffidavit." The matter was subsequently adjourned to June 17 to allow El-Rufai's legal team sufficient time to amend their filings and address the court's concerns.
Background of the N1 Billion Lawsuit
Nasir El-Rufai is seeking N1 billion in damages against multiple respondents, including the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), the Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney-General of the Federation. The lawsuit stems from a search conducted at his Abuja residence, which El-Rufai claims violated his constitutional rights.
In his detailed suit, the former governor argued that the search operation infringed upon his fundamental rights to dignity, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy. He has asked the court to:
- Declare the search unlawful and unconstitutional
- Render any evidence obtained during the search inadmissible in any legal proceedings
- Order the immediate return of all items seized during the operation
Defense Positions and Ongoing Legal Battle
The ICPC has maintained throughout the proceedings that its actions were based on a valid search warrant issued by a competent court and executed in strict accordance with due process. Commission representatives have emphasized their commitment to following established legal protocols in all investigative activities.
Similarly, the police have defended their involvement in the operation, stating unequivocally that they acted within their statutory powers and followed all required legal procedures. Police representatives have highlighted their obligation to execute court-issued warrants properly and professionally.
Other parties in the matter, including representatives of the police, the Attorney-General of the Federation, and the ICPC, did not oppose the application to remove the magistrate from the suit. This lack of opposition suggests strategic legal positioning as the case continues to evolve.
The case remains ongoing as both sides prepare further legal arguments and amendments to their respective positions. The adjournment to June 17 provides all parties with additional time to refine their legal strategies and address the substantive issues at the heart of this significant human rights litigation.
