The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday dismissed a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission by at least 161 Chinese and Nigerians being investigated on alleged internet fraud.

In a judgment, Justice James Omotosho, dismissed the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/80/2025/ for being unmeritorious.

Justice Omotosho held that the arrest of the suspects and their detention from January 9 and beyond, upon two remand orders obtained by the anti-graft agency to enable it conclude its investigation, did not amount to a breach of their rights.

The judge also held that the seizure of their passports while the investigation was ongoing was not unlawful.

Justice Omotosho agreed with the submission of the EFCC wherein the commission argued that the suspects were admitted to administrative bail after the expiration of the remand orders and that only those who met the bail terms were released.

He observed that the applicants (suspects), in their affidavit before the court, also attested to the facts.

The applicants, through their lawyer, Ishaka Dikko, SAN, sued the Executive Chairman of EFCC, Ola Olukoyede, and the commission as 1st and 2nd respondents.

In the originating motion filed on January 17, the senior lawyer listed Zhang Xiaowen, Liu Zhiwei, Chen Yeqiu, Lan Shunbin, who are Chinese nationals as 1st to 4th applicants.

Other are Abubakar Hassan, Igwe Ozioma, Gabriel Shimlumun, Abdulmuminu Usman, Olamide Olatoye Jeremiah Abele, Asule James, Bitrus Joseph, Odeh Abel, Jathan Jayock, Jackson Samson, Isiaq Olanrewaju, Adejor Isah, Salihu Suleiman and Joseph Ojoma.

They also include Tanko Isah, Omoyele Ebenezer, Olisakwe Chieme, Ohikwo Fatima Musa, Faith Agada, Opara Cynthia, Blessing Thomas and Rachel Habila, among others.

The counsel, in the four reliefs, sought a court’s declaration that the applicants were entitled to their fundamental right to dignity of human person, right to personal liberty and right to fair hearing.

These rights, he said, are enshrined in Sections 34, 35, 36, 43 and 46 of the 1999 (as amended).

He sought a declaration that the detention and/or the continuous detention of the suspects beyond the constitutional prescribed period for arrest or detention without an order of court from January 9 to January 16, and beyond was illegal, unlawful and contrary to their fundamental rights.

He also sought a declaration that the confiscation of the applicants’ passport numbers: E55480652, EL6128848, E91567245 and E99903655 from January 9 to January 16 without any court order was unlawful and contravened particularly Sections 36, 43 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution.

Dikko, therefore, sought an order directing the respondents jointly and/or severally to pay the applicants damages in the sum of N5 billion for the illegal detention from January 9 to January 16 and beyond.

In the affidavit deposed to by Swarlat Dajong, a litigation secretary in the law firm of M.I. Dikko and Associates, she averred that the 1st to 4th applicants are Chinese nationals who were in Nigeria on business visas.

She said while carrying out their business at Venus Spark Impact Media Ltd, the EFCC operatives raided the office at Plot No 288, Mamman Kontagora Crescent at Katampe in Abuja.

Dajong said the four Chinese nationals were arrested and detained alongside the 5th to 160th applicants on January 9 to January 16, and beyond against the constitutional prescribed period for detention of suspects without court order.

According to her, the 5th to 160th applicants are Nigerian citizens and employees of Venus Spark Impact Media Limited. 

Dikko, also in a motion on notice dated February 12 but filed February 13, sought an order of court admitting 16 of the suspects, including the four Chinese nationals, who had been on detention since their arrest to bail.

In the affidavit in support of the motion equally deposed to by Dajong, she averred that the suspects had spent more than 48 hours in EFCC’s custody.

She said by the remand order of the court on January 10 and January 24 respectively which the EFCC attached to their counter affidavit, Dajong said the order expired on January 31.

The litigation secretary said despite its expiration, the 16 suspects had been further kept in custody of the anti-graft agency since February 1 till date, without any further order of any court or being charged before a court of competent jurisdiction for any criminal offence contrary to the provisions of the constitution.

She clarified that a number of the suspects had been granted administrative bail, remaining the 16 applicants.

The EFCC, in its counter affidavit, disagreed with the applicant.

The commission argued that the applicants disguised themselves to engage in fraudulent activities.

The agency said their act was detrimental to national security and that the office of the National Security Adviser was fully involved in the investigation.

It urged the court to dismiss the suit.

Justice Omotosho held that the court had one question for determination “which is whether the fundamental rights of the applicants have been breached by the respondents.”

The judge, who enumerated what constitutes enforceable rights in Nigeria, said only rights provided under Chapter 4 of the constitution are enforceable.

He said, “However, these rights are not absolute.’’

He said the EFCC submitted that the applicants were arrested upon engaging in an internet scam which threatened national security, and that the commission had the mandate to investigate economic crime.

Justice Omotosho held that evidence before the court showed that the agency obtained a remand order from a magistrates’ court on January 10 to detain the applicants for 14 days and on January 24, it got another remand order to detain them for seven more days.

The judge said any remand from January 10 to January 31 was reasonable in the circumstance.

He agreed with the EFCC that considering their number, the commission could not have completed its investigation within 10 days which was why the need for the second remand order.

He said having been granted administrative bail, he held that the intention of the anti-graft agency was not to keep them beyond normal.

The judge held that the failure of some of the applicants to meet the bail conditions cannot be blamed on the EFCC.

Justice Omotosho, who declared that their detention did not amount to a breach of their fundamental rights, also held that the confiscation of their passports while they were under investigation was not illegal.

He said, “This case is bound to fail and it has failed.’’

The judge consequently dismissed the suit for lack of merit.

(NAN)