The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/466/2026, centered on a dispute over the scope of the EFCC’s investigative powers and the right to privacy. Ms. Achimugu, who serves as the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Felak Concept Group, challenged the commission’s entry into her home and the subsequent seizure of her vehicles, jewellery, and other assets. She sought a declaration that the EFCC had acted outside its statutory mandate and violated her constitutional right to privacy. Additionally, she requested an order restraining the commission from engaging in further threats, harassment, or unlawful invasions of her private residence.
A central component of the litigation was her claim for N10 billion in damages, which she characterized as compensation for an “invasion of her privacy.” However, Justice Liman rejected this claim, holding that Ms. Achimugu and her legal representatives failed to establish sufficient grounds to justify the magnitude of the damages sought. The judge determined that there was no legal basis to restrain the EFCC from performing its statutory duties, noting that the agency’s actions were predicated on received intelligence concerning the plaintiff’s alleged criminal conduct.
“EFCC has the right to search the residence,” Justice Liman stated in the judgment.
The court ultimately dismissed the suit for lack of merit, describing the action as “frivolous and brought in bad faith.” This characterization suggests that the judiciary viewed the litigation not merely as a matter of differing legal interpretations, but as an attempt to obstruct the agency’s mandate or waste judicial resources.
Reacting to the ruling, Emenike Mgbemele, counsel to the EFCC, welcomed the decision as being in the interest of justice. He characterized the suit as an effort to delay or impede the commission’s investigations, stating that the agency should not be hindered in the execution of its core functions.
The dismissal of this civil action follows a significant procedural development in related criminal proceedings. In July 2026, Justice Jude Onwugbuzie of the Federal Capital Territory High Court in Apo, Abuja, ordered the final forfeiture of assets valued at approximately N8.9 billion to the Federal Government. These assets, which were subject to the EFCC’s investigation, included jewellery valued at N4.65 billion, 11 exotic vehicles worth N4.29 billion, $50,000 in foreign currency, and N30 million in cash.
The forfeiture order was granted on an application filed by the EFCC seeking the permanent confiscation of properties linked to Ms. Achimugu. The recent dismissal of the fundamental rights suit effectively closes a legal challenge that could have potentially complicated the enforcement of that forfeiture order or exposed the agency to significant financial liability. By affirming the EFCC’s power to search and seize based on intelligence, the Federal High Court has reinforced the operational framework under which Nigerian anti-graft agencies conduct investigations.
For Ms. Achimugu, the outcome underscores the limitations of using fundamental rights litigation to challenge preliminary investigative steps when the agency can demonstrate a basis for its actions through intelligence or suspicion of crime. The ruling does not adjudicate the merits of any underlying criminal charges, if they exist, but rather confirms the procedural legality of the search and seizure actions taken by the commission.
The legal landscape for future claims against the EFCC in similar circumstances may now be more constrained, as this judgment serves as a precedent that intelligence-based searches are within the agency’s statutory purview, provided they are not demonstrably abusive. The dismissal stands as a final determination on the specific claims raised in FHC/ABJ/CS/466/2026, with no immediate indication of further appellate review mentioned in the public record.
