Follow Us on Google
From Godwin Tsa, Abuja
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday dismissed a N10 billion fundamental rights suit filed by Nollywood actor Emeka Ike against Lere Olayinka, Senior Special Assistant to FCT Minister Nyesom Wike, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Delivering judgment, Justice Salim Ibrahim upheld the preliminary objections of the respondents, holding that the suit was incompetent and improperly constituted.
The judge agreed with the respondents that the action did not meet the threshold for a fundamental rights enforcement proceeding.
Defining fundamental rights as inalienable and inherent rights derived from natural law, he noted that the applicant’s complaint was essentially one of breach of data protection law.
Justice Ibrahim held that an applicant in such a suit bears the burden of providing strong and convincing evidence, adding that ordinary and general assertions would not suffice.
“The applicant has a burden to prove the facts as alleged by him. In the instant case, I did not see his inalienable rights that has been breached by the 1st and 2nd respondents,” he said.
The court further held that the action was wrongly commenced by originating summons instead of a writ of summons. According to the judge, since the issues raised were contentious and hostile in nature, a writ of summons was the proper mode of commencement.
“On the whole, the notice of preliminary objection by the respondents hereby succeeds and the suit is hereby dismissed. The cumulative effect is that this suit is incompetent, improperly constituted by way of an originating summons,” he held.
Proceeding on the assumption, without conceding, that the court had jurisdiction, Justice Ibrahim also determined the matter on its merits. He said he was persuaded by the respondents’ affidavit evidence and held that the applicant had failed to establish his case.
Ike, a House of Representatives aspirant on the platform of the NDC, filed the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1272/2026, on Monday, June 15, 2026.
Other News
Through his counsel, Leonard Adeh, he sought N10 billion in damages against INEC and Olayinka for the alleged violation of his fundamental right to privacy.
He asked the court to declare that Olayinka’s publication of his database on X without his approval “amounts to gross breach and violation of the applicant’s fundamental right to privacy and the protection of personal data.”
In a counter affidavit filed by his counsel, Akpama Ekwe, Olayinka maintained that the only details contained in the document he published were the applicant’s name and passport photograph, and that this information was already in the public domain and had not been obtained through any unlawful means.
He said he owed the applicant no duty of care or confidentiality and did not need his consent to publish the details.
Olayinka further argued that Ike, having offered himself for election to the House of Representatives and being a Nollywood star, could not claim trauma over the circulation of a name and photograph he had personally presented to the public.
He added that information on a voter’s card is not private data, citing Section 19(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026.
The provision requires INEC, not later than 90 days before a general election, to appoint a seven-day period during which the voters’ register for each local government, area council or ward is displayed or published for public scrutiny at every registration area and on its official website.
In its own counter affidavit, deposed to by Anthonia Makwe, an Assistant Director and Data Protection Officer in its Legal Drafting and Clearance department, INEC said the information complained of was neither classified, sensitive nor confidential.
The commission stated that its statutory responsibilities include the compilation, maintenance, display, publication, certification and management of the register of voters under the 1999 Constitution (as amended), the Electoral Act 2026 and the National Data Protection Act 2023.
INEC said it has the statutory and constitutional power to make voters’ information available to the public without the consent of any registered voter. It added that the material allegedly posted by Olayinka on X did not emanate from the commission.
Describing itself as a data controller, INEC maintained that it had never breached its statutory duty of care, custody and protection of voters’ personal data held in its secured portal and restricted database.
