By Newspot Nigeria Staff Reporter
An Abuja Federal High Court has dismissed a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by one Mr. James Ereboye against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), describing the case as an abuse of court process and lacking in merit.
Mr. Ereboye had dragged the anti-graft agency to court, contesting the legality of ICPC’s directive to impose a “Post No Debit” restriction on his bank account without first obtaining a court order. He further sought N40,287,209 in damages and N5 million in legal costs, alleging that the commission had infringed on his fundamental rights.
However, in his ruling on Thursday, Justice Emeka Nwite ruled that the matter had already been decided by another judge—Justice Babangida Hassan—of a court with equal jurisdiction and was also pending before the Court of Appeal. Justice Nwite called the fresh filing “appalling” and an instance of “judicial rascality,” warning against what he described as deliberate abuse of legal processes.
“It is a classical act of abuse of court process. I deliberately refuse this rascality,” Justice Nwite declared during proceedings. “The court has the right to invoke its coercive power to punish the plaintiff.”
The judge then awarded N200,000 in damages to each of the three defendants in the matter: ICPC, Sterling Bank, and Polaris Bank.
Crucially, the court upheld ICPC’s statutory authority under Section 45(1) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000 to place a Post No Debit (PND) restriction on any account under investigation—without the need for prior court authorization. The ruling reinforces the Commission’s ability to act swiftly when probing financial crimes and fraudulent transactions.
The ICPC, through its spokesperson Demola Bakare, fsi, welcomed the judgment as a strong affirmation of its investigative powers and a warning against frivolous litigation tactics designed to obstruct anti-corruption efforts.
This latest ruling underscores the judiciary’s growing intolerance for legal maneuvers that aim to frustrate the fight against graft.
For more updates on anti-corruption developments in Nigeria, stay tuned to Newspot Nigeria.
FULL STATEMENT FROM ICPC BELOW:
INDEPENDENT CORRUPT PRACTICES AND OTHER RELATED OFFENCES COMMISSION (ICPC)
PRESS RELEASE
Thursday 10th July, 2025
Abuja Court Strikes Out Fundamental Rights Suit Against ICPC
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has struck out a fundamental rights suit brought against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) by one Mr. James Ereboye.
The suit, which sought to question the ICPC’s power to place a ‘Post No Debit’ on the plaintiff’s account without a court order, was adjudged as lacking in merit.
The plaintiff had also sought the order of the court to compel the ICPC to pay him the sum of forty-million, two hundred and eighty-seven thousand, two-hundred and nine-naira (N40,287,209) and a cost of legal services of five million naira (N5,000,000).
In his ruling on the matter on Thursday, Justice Emeka Nwite said the suit itself was an abuse of court process and lacked merit.
The judge explained that the suit, which had earlier been decided by his learned colleague, Justice Babangida Hassan of a court of coordinate jurisdiction, and which has also been filed at the Court of Appeal, need not have been brought to his court.
Justice Nwite added that he found the suit “appalling” and described it as “judicial rascality” and an abuse of court process.
He therefore awarded damages against the plaintiff.
In his words, “It is a classical act of abuse of court process. I deliberately refuse this rascality. The court has the right to invoke its coercive power to punish the plaintiff, and I hereby order that the sum of Two Hundred Thousand naira be paid to each of the defendants (ICPC, Sterling Bank, and Polaris Bank).”
The judgment further upheld ICPC’s powers as contained in section 45 (1) of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Act 2000 to place a “post no debit” on any account suspected as fraudulent or which is the object of investigation without a court order; a law which the plaintiff believed infringed on his right and was seeking for the lifting of the clause on the account as well as payment of other damages.
Signed
Demola Bakare, fsi
Director, Public Enlightenment and Education/
Spokesperson for the Commission
