Court Dismisses Emeka Ike’s N10bn Privacy Suit Against Wike’s Aide, INEC

By Vivian Okejeme

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).

Justice Salim Ibrahim, in his judgment, upheld the preliminary objections filed by the defendants, ruling that the suit was incompetent and improperly constituted.

The court held that the case did not meet the requirements for a fundamental rights enforcement proceeding.

Justice Ibrahim noted that the applicant’s complaint was essentially about an alleged breach of data protection law rather than a violation of an inalienable and inherent right derived from natural law.

The court further held that an applicant in such a suit bears the burden of providing strong and convincing evidence, adding that 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 have been breached by the first and second respondents,” the judge said.

The court also 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 considered the case 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.

Through his counsel, Leonard Adeh, he sought N10 billion in damages against INEC and Olayinka over the alleged violation of his fundamental right to privacy.

He asked the court to declare that Olayinka’s publication of his voter database on X without his consent “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 through his counsel, Akpama Ekwe, Olayinka maintained that the only details contained in the document he published were the applicant’s name and passport photograph. He argued that the 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 require 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 to have suffered 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 was 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 designate 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 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 nor sensitive or confidential.

The commission stated that its statutory responsibilities include the compilation, maintenance, display, publication, certification and management of the voters’ register under the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the Electoral Act, 2026, and the National Data Protection Act, 2023.

INEC said it had the statutory and constitutional authority to make voters’ information available to the public without obtaining the consent of registered voters. It added that the material allegedly posted by Olayinka on X did not originate 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 on its secure portal and in its restricted database.