The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday dismissed a ₦10bn fundamental rights suit filed by Nollywood actor Emeka Ike against Lere Olayinka, Senior Special Assistant on Public Communications to FCT Minister Nyesom Wike, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Justice Salim Ibrahim dismissed the suit after upholding preliminary objections filed by the respondents, who challenged its competence and proper constitution. The judge also dismissed the substantive suit for lack of proof.
Ike had accused Olayinka of violating his right to privacy by publishing his voter registration details on his X account in May.
The actor alleged that the publication exposed his personal information, including details of the transfer of his voter registration from Imo State to the Federal Capital Territory.
He subsequently filed the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1272/2026, through his lawyer, L.T. Adeh, seeking ₦10bn in aggravated and general damages against the respondents.
Ike, who sought to contest the AMAC/Bwari Federal Constituency seat in the House of Representatives in the 2027 general elections on the platform of the Nigerian Democratic Congress, lost the party’s primary election.
In the suit, Ike asked the court to declare that Olayinka’s publication of his voter registration details without his consent amounted to a violation of his fundamental right to privacy and the protection of personal data.
He relied on Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and Sections 24 and 39 of the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, to support his claim.
The actor also sought a declaration that INEC owed him and other registered voters a statutory duty to protect their personal information against unauthorised access.
He further asked the court to declare that INEC’s June 2 statement, issued in response to the circulation of his voter information on social media, amounted to an admission of liability.
Ike also sought an order directing Olayinka to remove the disputed publication from his X account and tender a written apology for the alleged infringement of his rights.
However, INEC and Olayinka urged the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that the publication did not violate Ike’s fundamental rights.
In its counter-affidavit, INEC maintained that the information in question was neither classified nor confidential, arguing that it had the legal authority to make certain voter information available to the public.
The commission also denied that the information allegedly published by Olayinka originated from its database, insisting that it had not breached its duty to protect voters’ personal information within its secured systems.
INEC said its statutory responsibilities included the compilation, maintenance, display, publication, certification and management of the voters’ register in accordance with the Constitution, the Electoral Act, 2026, and the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023.
Olayinka also denied wrongdoing, arguing that the document he published contained only Ike’s name and passport photograph, which he claimed were already publicly available.
He maintained that the information was not obtained unlawfully and that he had no duty of confidentiality requiring him to seek Ike’s consent before publishing it.
The FCT minister’s aide further argued that Ike, having presented himself as a public figure and expressed an intention to contest an election, could not claim to have suffered trauma from the circulation of his name and photograph.
Olayinka alleged that the publication followed an incident in which Ike led a group of hoodlums to INEC’s office to disrupt its activities after declaring his interest in the election.
According to Olayinka, the publication was intended to remind Ike that he had recently transferred his voter registration area and draw public attention to relevant electoral provisions.
He also cited Section 19(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, arguing that INEC was required to publish the voters’ register within the period prescribed by law ahead of a general election.
Olayinka further relied on INEC’s June 2 statement, which he said confirmed that there had been no external breach of its continuous voter registration database, hacking incident or unauthorised access to its information technology infrastructure.
The statement, as quoted in his counter-affidavit, said, “There was no external breach of its CVR database, no hacking incident and no unauthorised external access to the commission’s ICT infrastructure.”
He also argued that he was not a data controller under the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, and therefore had no statutory obligation to safeguard Ike’s information in the manner alleged.
Rejecting the claim for damages, Olayinka described Ike’s ₦10bn demand as being made in bad faith and urged the court to dismiss the suit in the interest of justice.
Discover more from VOICE OF THE PEOPLE
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
