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

The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a N10bn 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 case on Wednesday after upholding preliminary objections raised by the respondents challenging the suit’s competence and proper constitution. The court also threw out the substantive claim, citing a lack of proof.

Ike had accused Olayinka of breaching his right to privacy by sharing his voter registration details on his X account in May.

The actor argued that the post exposed his personal information, including details of his transfer of voter registration from Imo State to the Federal Capital Territory.

He subsequently filed suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1272/2026 through his lawyer, L.T. Adeh, demanding N10bn in general and aggravated damages from the respondents.

Ike had sought to contest the AMAC/Bwari Federal Constituency seat in the House of Representatives in the 2027 general elections under the platform of the Nigerian Democratic Congress but lost the party’s primary election.

In his court filing, the actor asked the judge to declare that Olayinka’s publication of his voter registration information 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, in support of his claim.

The actor also asked the court to declare that INEC had a “statutory duty of care” to protect the personal information of registered voters from unauthorised access.

He further argued that the commission’s June 2 statement responding to the circulation of his voter details on social media amounted to a tacit admission of guilt and liability.

Among the reliefs he sought was an order compelling Olayinka to delete the disputed post from his X account, #OlayinkaLere, and issue a written apology over the alleged violation of his rights.

However, both INEC and Olayinka urged the court to dismiss the case, denying that the publication breached the actor’s fundamental rights.

READ ALSO:

In its counter-affidavit, INEC argued that the information in question was neither classified, sensitive nor confidential. The commission maintained that the law permitted it to make certain details contained in the voters’ register available to the public.

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

The electoral body maintained 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”.

INEC said its statutory duties included compiling, maintaining, displaying, publishing, certifying and managing the voters’ register in line with the Constitution, the Electoral Act, 2026, and the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023.

It also denied that the information allegedly shared by Olayinka came from its database, insisting that it had not violated its obligation to secure voters’ personal information within its protected portal and restricted database.

Olayinka similarly denied any wrongdoing, claiming that the material he posted contained only Ike’s name and passport photograph, which he said were already publicly available.

The FCT minister’s aide argued that he did not obtain the information unlawfully and was under no confidentiality obligation requiring him to seek Ike’s consent before publishing it.

He also contended that Ike, as a public figure who had expressed an intention to contest an election, could not reasonably claim to have suffered trauma from the circulation of his name and photograph.

Olayinka further 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 intention to contest the election.

According to the aide, the post was intended to draw attention to Ike’s recent transfer of voter registration and remind the public of the relevant electoral provisions.

He cited Section 19(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, arguing that INEC was required to publish the voters’ register within the period stipulated by law ahead of a general election.

Olayinka also relied on the commission’s June 2 statement, which he said established that its continuous voter registration database had not suffered an external breach, 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 maintained that he was not a data controller under the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023, and therefore had no statutory responsibility to protect Ike’s information in the manner alleged.

Rejecting the actor’s demand for compensation, Olayinka described the N10bn claim as an act of 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 sharing information he claimed was already accessible to the public and urged the court to dismiss the suit in the interest of justice.