The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed Nollywood actor Emeka Ike’s ₦10bn fundamental rights suit against Lere Olayinka, a senior aide to FCT Minister Nyesom Wike, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) over the publication of his voter registration details on social media.
Justice Salim Ibrahim, in a judgment delivered on Wednesday, upheld the respondents’ preliminary objections, ruling that the suit was incompetent and improperly constituted. The court also dismissed the substantive case for lack of proof.
Ike had accused Olayinka of violating his right to privacy by publishing details of his voter registration transfer from Imo State to Abuja on his X account in May.
The actor, who had sought to contest the 2027 House of Representatives election for the AMAC/Bwari Federal Constituency on the platform of the Nigerian Democratic Congress, demanded ₦10bn in aggravated and general damages against the two respondents.
He also asked the court to order Olayinka to delete the post, retract the publication and tender a written apology.
In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1272/2026, Ike argued that the publication violated his fundamental right to privacy under Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and provisions of the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023.
He further sought a declaration that INEC had breached its statutory duty to protect voters’ personal information and that the commission’s June 2 statement on the incident amounted to an admission of liability.
INEC opposed the suit, arguing that the information in question was neither classified nor confidential and that the publication did not result from a breach of its database.
In a counter-affidavit deposed to by Anthonia Makwe, an assistant director and data protection officer in the commission’s Legal Drafting and Clearance Department, INEC maintained that the publication of voters’ information fell within its statutory responsibilities under the Electoral Act, 2026.
The commission said it was empowered to compile, maintain, display and publish the register of voters in line with the law.
It also maintained that the material allegedly published by Olayinka did not originate from its systems.
“The 2nd respondent, as a data controller, has never breached its statutory duty of care, custody and protection of personal voter information and data; it owes the applicant and other voters under its secured portal and restricted database,” the commission stated.
Olayinka, in his counter-affidavit, denied violating Ike’s privacy, arguing that the document he published contained only the actor’s name and passport photograph, which he said were already in the public domain.
He maintained that he did not obtain the information through unlawful means and argued that he had no duty to keep the material confidential or seek Ike’s consent before publishing it.
Olayinka also argued that Ike had made his identity and photograph public in connection with his political ambition and career as a Nollywood actor.
He further claimed that the publication was intended to draw attention to Ike’s voter registration transfer and the relevant provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.
The aide alleged that the publication followed an incident in which Ike led a group of people to an INEC office to disrupt its activities after declaring his intention to contest the election. The allegation was part of Olayinka’s response to the suit.
Olayinka also argued that INEC’s statement had clarified that there was no external breach of its Continuous Voter Registration database, no hacking incident and no unauthorised external access to its information technology infrastructure.
Rejecting Ike’s demand for damages, he described the reliefs sought as being made in bad faith and accused the actor of seeking to benefit financially from the dispute.
He urged the court to dismiss the suit.
The court’s decision brings the ₦10bn claim to an end at the trial court, with the judge holding that the suit was incompetent and that the substantive claims had not been proved.
