Court Dismisses Emeka Ike’s Suit Against Wike’s Aide

The 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 on Public Communications to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike, and the Independent National Electoral Commission.

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 fundamental right to privacy by publishing his voter registration details on his X handle 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.

Ike subsequently instituted the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1272/2026, through his lawyer, L.T. Adeh, seeking N10 billion in aggravated and general damages against the respondents.

The actor, who aspired 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 “amounts to gross breach and violation of the applicant’s 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 of care” to protect their personal information against unauthorised access.

He further asked the court to declare that INEC’s June 2 press statement, issued in response to the circulation of his voter information on social media, amounted to a tacit admission of guilt and liability.

Ike sought an order directing Olayinka to remove the disputed publication from his X account, @OlayinkaLere, and tender a written apology for the alleged infringement of his rights.

However, INEC and Olayinka urged the court to dismiss the suit, insisting that the publication did not amount to a breach of Ike’s fundamental rights.

In its counter-affidavit, INEC maintained that the information complained about was neither classified, sensitive nor confidential, arguing that the electoral body was legally empowered to make certain voter information available to the public.

The commission’s response was deposed to by Anthonia Makwe, an assistant director and data protection officer in its Legal Drafting and Clearance Department.

INEC argued that it had the “statutory and constitutional power to make available information of its voters to the general public without the consent of any registered voter”.

The commission 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.

It also denied that the information allegedly published by Olayinka originated from its database.

INEC stated that it had not breached its statutory duty to protect voters’ personal information within its secured portal and restricted database.

Olayinka, in his counter-affidavit, also denied wrongdoing, maintaining that the document he published contained only Ike’s name and passport photograph, which he claimed were already in the public domain.

He argued that the information was not obtained through any unlawful means and that he owed the actor no duty of confidentiality requiring his consent before publishing the material.

The FCT minister’s aide further contended 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 also argued that the publication was made after Ike allegedly led a group of hoodlums to INEC’s office to disrupt its activities following his declaration of interest in the election.

According to him, the publication was intended to remind the actor that he had recently transferred his voter registration area and draw public attention to the relevant electoral provisions.

He further 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 also 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 argued that he was not a data controller under the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, and therefore had no statutory obligation to safeguard the actor’s information in the manner alleged.

Rejecting Ike’s demand for damages, Olayinka described the N10 billion claim as being made in bad faith, calling it “an indication that the applicant is a gold digger who wants to reap where he did not sow”.

He insisted that he should not be held liable for publishing information he claimed was already publicly accessible and urged the court to dismiss the suit in the interest of justice.

The court dismissed the suit after upholding the respondents’ preliminary objections and finding that the substantive claims lacked proof.