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

The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a N10 billion suit filed by Nollywood actor, Emeka Ike, against the Senior Special Assistant to the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, Lere Olayinka, and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) over the publication of his voter registration details.

Justice Salim Ibrahim, in a judgment delivered on Wednesday, upheld the preliminary objections raised by the respondents, holding that the suit was incompetent and improperly constituted.

The court also dismissed the substantive suit for lack of sufficient proof.

Ike had sued Olayinka and INEC as first and second respondents in suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1272/2026, alleging that the publication of his voter registration information on X violated his fundamental right to privacy and protection of personal data.

The actor, who had sought to contest the AMAC/Bwari Federal Constituency seat in the House of Representatives in the 2027 general election on the platform of the Nigerian Democratic Congress (NDC), lost the party’s primary.

The dispute arose after Olayinka, in a May post on X, published information relating to Ike’s voter registration transfer from Imo State to the Federal Capital Territory.

Ike, through his lawyer, L.T. Adeh, argued that the publication was made without his consent and constituted a breach of Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution, Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and relevant provisions of the Nigeria Data Protection Act, 2023.

He asked the court to award him N10 billion in aggravated and general damages against Olayinka and INEC, jointly and severally.

He also sought an order compelling Olayinka to delete the post, issue a written apology and retract the publication containing what he described as his private voter information.

Ike further urged the court to declare that INEC owed him and other registered voters a statutory duty of care to protect their personal data from unauthorised access.

He also challenged an INEC statement issued on June 2 in reaction to the circulation of his voter information, arguing that the statement amounted to a tacit admission of liability.

But INEC and Olayinka urged the court to dismiss the suit, denying any breach of Ike’s privacy rights.

INEC, in its counter-affidavit deposed to by Anthonia Makwe, an Assistant Director and Data Protection Officer in its Legal Drafting and Clearance Department, argued that the information complained of was neither classified, sensitive nor confidential.

The Commission maintained that the publication and display of voter information were carried out in accordance with the Electoral Act, 2026.

It said it had statutory and constitutional powers to make certain information contained in the voters’ register available to the public without obtaining the consent of individual voters.

INEC also maintained that the information allegedly published by Olayinka did not emanate from its database and insisted that there had been no breach, hacking or unauthorised external access to its information infrastructure.

Olayinka, in his separate counter-affidavit, described Ike’s claims as being made in bad faith.

He argued that the document he published contained only Ike’s name and passport photograph, which he said were already in the public domain.

According to him, the information was not obtained through any unlawful means, adding that he owed Ike no duty of confidentiality in respect of information already publicly accessible.

Olayinka further argued that Ike, having presented himself for election and being a public figure, could not reasonably claim to have been traumatised by the circulation of his name and passport photograph.

He cited Section 19(1) of the Electoral Act, 2026, which, according to him, requires INEC to publish the voters’ register not later than 90 days before a general election.

The FCT minister’s aide also claimed that the publication was made after Ike allegedly led a group of people to an INEC office to disrupt its activities shortly after declaring his intention to contest the election.

He said his post was intended to draw attention to Ike’s transfer of his voter registration and the relevant provisions of the law.

Olayinka also disputed Ike’s claim that INEC had admitted liability, pointing to the commission’s statement that there had been no external breach of its Continuous Voter Registration (CVR) database, hacking incident or unauthorised access to its ICT infrastructure.

He maintained that he was not a data controller under the Nigeria Data Protection Act and therefore had no statutory obligation to safeguard Ike’s voter information.

Olayinka consequently urged the court to dismiss the suit, describing the N10 billion damages claim as an attempt to profit from information that was already publicly accessible.