A Federal Capital Territory High Court in Maitama, Abuja, has dismissed a ₦20 million fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by Mrs. Christiana Dagogo-George against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences CommissionICPC to Deploy Ethics and Integrity Compliance Scorecard in MDAs (ICPC).
Dagogo-George, the Project Manager of Wiseworld Firm Consult Limited, alleged that her fundamental rights were violated during her arrest and detention by ICPC between October 17 and 19, 2022. The arrest stemmed from investigations into contracts awarded to her company by the Nigeria Police Trust Fund in June 2022.
The ICPC’s probe uncovered that Mrs. Dagogo-George had secured eight separate training contracts, each valued at nearly ₦37 million, through different companies reportedly linked to her. The contracts were intended to fund training sessions across eight locations nationwide.
However, the Commission’s investigation revealed that despite full payment of over ₦100 million, training sessions occurred in only three of the eight locations. According to the ICPC’s counter-affidavit, the funds for the remaining five locations were allegedly diverted for personal use by Dagogo-George.
ICPC further denied any breach of her fundamental rights, stating that she was granted bail immediately after presenting herself for questioning. The Commission claimed that Mrs. Dagogo-George violated bail terms by failing to respond to subsequent invitations, leading to revocation and reissuance of bail under stricter conditions, which she reportedly did not meet until January 2023.
Additionally, ICPC submitted evidence that Mrs. Dagogo-George agreed to refund ₦10 million of the unutilized funds.
In his ruling, Justice U.P. Kekemeke held that the applicant failed to prove any infringement on her right to personal liberty during the brief detention. The court ruled that a lawful investigative invitation does not amount to a violation of fundamental rights.
The judge stated, “The documents presented by the Applicant were deemed surplusage and lacked legal weight. Overall, the Applicant has not established a case to warrant the relief sought. Consequently, the suit is dismissed.”
This judgment highlights the judiciary’s stance on procedural correctness during corruption investigations and reaffirms that lawful detention under due process does not constitute fundamental rights violations.
The case also underscores ongoing scrutiny by anti-corruption agencies into the management of public funds, especially in contracts involving training and capacity building.
With increasing public concern about the integrity of government contracts and the accountability of contractors, this ruling sends a clear message on the importance of transparency and adherence to legal processes in anti-corruption enforcement.