The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court sitting in Kurudu, Abuja, has declined jurisdiction to hear a suit filed by businessman Adediran Seyi and his company, Equilibrium Management Limited.
The suit sought to restrain the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) from investigating them over a petition submitted to the agency.
The court held that the action was procedurally defective and could not be entertained, effectively dismissing the bid to restrain the anti-graft commission from carrying out its statutory duties.
The Applicants had approached the court after receiving an invitation from the ICPC in connection with an ongoing inquiry.
In the suit, they sought an order restraining the Commission and other respondents from inviting, questioning or investigating them, while also alleging a possible breach of their fundamental rights.
They further claimed that the ICPC and other respondents, allegedly acting at the instance of certain individuals, might infringe on their constitutional rights guaranteed under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended.
In response, the ICPC opposed the application through a counter-affidavit filed by its counsel, Leslie Iheduru, describing the suit as speculative, vexatious and lacking in merit.
The Commission argued that the Applicants failed to present any credible evidence showing that their rights had been violated or were under imminent threat.
The anti-corruption agency maintained that the action was a deliberate attempt to misuse the judicial process in order to evade lawful investigation. It stressed that an invitation by a law enforcement agency to assist in an inquiry does not amount to a violation of constitutional rights.
To support its position, the ICPC relied on judicial authorities, including the Court of Appeal decision in Onnis & Ors v. Alakija & Ors (2018) LPELR-50607 (CA), which affirmed that a mere invitation by a law enforcement agency cannot be construed as persecution or harassment.
The Commission also urged the court not to allow the judiciary to be used as a shield against legitimate investigations, warning that granting such reliefs would improperly confer immunity on individuals and weaken the constitutional mandate of agencies charged with enforcing the law.
After parties adopted their processes on October 23, 2025, the matter was adjourned for judgment.
Delivering judgment on April 28, 2026, Justice Katsina Alu declined jurisdiction to hear the suit.
The court held that the Applicants failed to comply with the procedural requirements stipulated under Section 46 of the 1999 Constitution and Order II Rule 1 of the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, having improperly commenced the matter through a joint application for enforcement of rights.
The ruling reinforces the principle that due process must be strictly observed in fundamental rights proceedings and that investigative agencies should not be hindered from carrying out lawful responsibilities through defective court actions.
Following the judgment, the ICPC reiterated its commitment to discharging its mandate in accordance with the law and urged members of the public to cooperate with lawful investigations.