By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The All Progressives Congress (APC) has achieved a significant milestone in the consolidation of its policy and ideological framework with the formal inauguration of the Governing Council of The Progressive Institute (TPI). The ceremony, which took place at the party’s National Secretariat in Abuja, was personally conducted by the APC National Chairman, Professor Nentawe Goshwe Yilwatda, and witnessed by members of the National Working Committee (NWC).

This inauguration represents the culmination of the institute’s governance process, building upon its initial unveiling in September 2024 under the previous leadership of Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje. Established at the directive of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, The Progressive Institute is conceived as the party’s intellectual backbone, functioning as a think tank and policy resource center dedicated to deepening ideological foundations and advancing research-driven governance.

The institute has achieved full registration with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) and has secured necessary approvals from the Federal Ministry of Education and the National Board for Technical Education (NBTE), demonstrating strict adherence to legal standards and underscoring the APC’s commitment to transparency, institutional integrity, and the rule of law.

Its core mandate encompasses driving policy research and publications, organizing national and international conferences and training programs, building leadership and institutional capacity within the party, strengthening ideological foundations and democratic culture, and serving as the institutional memory of the APC.

Speaking as Chairman of the Governing Council, Professor Yilwatda assured Nigerians of the party leadership’s unwavering commitment to developing the institute into a world-class political and policy entity. He extended his congratulations to the council members on their appointments and commended their dedication to advancing the progressive agenda.

The Chairman also expressed gratitude to President Tinubu for his visionary guidance and to his predecessor, Dr. Ganduje, for establishing the solid foundation upon which the institution now builds.

“Together, we are building ideas, institutions, and leadership for today and for the future,” Professor Yilwatda affirmed.

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

Former Gov. Nasir El-Rufai of Kaduna State has filed a N1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Enforcement Commission (ICPC) over alleged unlawful invasion of his Abuja residence.

El-Rufai, through his team of lawyers led by Oluwole Iyamu, SAN, prayed the court to declare that the search warrant issued on Feb. 4 by the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT (2nd respondent), authorising the search and seizure at his residence was invalid, null and void.

He urged the court to declare that the search warrant was “null and void for lack of particularity, material drafting errors, ambiguity in execution parameters, overbreadth, and absence of probable cause thereby constituting an unlawful and unreasonable search in violation of Section 37 of the Constitution.”

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that the former governor had, in the originating motion on notice marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, sued ICPC as 1st respondent.

El-Rufai named the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT, Abuja Magisterial District; I-G and Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as 2nd to 4th respondents respectively.

In the suit dated and filed Feb. 20 by Iyamu, the detained ex-governor sought seven reliefs.

He prayed the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on Feb. 19 at about 2pm and executed by agents of ICPC and I-G, “under the aforesaid invalid warrant, amounts to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights to dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.”

He urged the court to declare that “any evidence obtained pursuant to the aforesaid invalid warrant and unlawful search is inadmissible in any proceedings against the applicant, as it was procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.”

El-Rufai, therefore, sought an order of injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further relying on, using, or tendering any evidence or items seized during the unlawful search in any investigation, prosecution, or proceedings involving him.

“An order directing the Ist and 3rd respondents (ICPC and I-G) to forthwith retum all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together with a detailed inventory thereof.

“An order awarding the sum of N1,000,000,000.00 (One Billion Naira) as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages against the respondents jointly and severally for the violations of the applicant’s fundamental rights, including trespass, unlawful seizure, and the resultant psychological trauma, humiliation, distress, infringement of privacy, and reputational harm.”

El-Rufai did the breakdown of the N1 billion in damages to include “a N300 million as compensatory damages for psychological trauma, emotional distress, and loss of personal security;

A N400 million as exemplary damages to deter future misconduct by law enforcement agencies and vindicate the applicant’s rights.

A N300 million as aggravated damages for the malicious, high-handed and oppressive nature of the respondents’ actions, including the use of a patently defective warrant procured through misleading representations.”

He equally sought a N100 million as cost of filing the suit, including legal fees and associated expenses.

In his grounds of argument, the senior lawyer argued that the search warrant was fundamentally defective, lacking specificity in the description of items to be seized, containing material typographical errors, ambiguous execution terms, overbroad directives, and no verifiable probable cause.

He said this was in contravention of Sections 143-148 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015; Section 36 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC) Act, 2000, and constitutional protections against arbitrary intrusions.

Specifically, Iyamu argued that Section 143 of the ACJA requires that an application for a search warrant be supported by information in writing and on oath, setting forth reasonable grounds for suspicion, which was absent here as evidenced by the incomplete initiating clause;

He said Section 144 mandates particular descriptions of the place to be searched and the items sought, to prevent general warrants.

He, however, argued that the instant warrant vaguely referred to “the thing aforesaid” without any detail.

“Section 146 stipulates that the warrant must be in the prescribed form, free from defects that could mislead, but the document is riddled with errors in the address, date, and district designation;

“Section 147 allows direction to specified persons, but the warrant’s indiscriminate addressing to “all officers is overbroad and unaccountable.

“Section 148 permits execution at reasonable times, but the contradictory language creates ambiguity, undermining procedural clarity,” he submitted.

Iyamu stated that the execution of the invalid warrant on Feb. 19 resulted in an unlawful invasion of his client’s premises, constituting violations of the rights to dignity (Section 34), personal liberty (Section 35), fair hearing (Section 36), and privacy (Section 37) of the Constitution.

He further argued that the search was conducted without legal justification and in a manner that inflicted humiliation and distress.

“Evidence obtained without a valid warrant is unlawful and inadmissible, as established in judicial precedents such as C.O.P. v. Omoh (1969) NCLR 137, where the court ruled that evidence procured through improper means contravenes fundamental rights and must be excluded,” he said.

The lawyer, who also cited the case of Fawehinmi v. IGP (2000) 7 NWLR (Pt. 665) 481, said the court condemned vague warrants as affording unbridled discretion and leading to abuse.

He equally gave a plethora of cases to back his argument.

In the affidavit in support of the application, Mohammed Shaba, a Principal Secretary to the former governor, averred that on Feb. 19 at about 2p.m., officers from the ICPC and Nigeria Police Force invaded the residence under a purported search warrant issued on or about Feb. 4.

According to him, the said warrant is invalid due to its lack of specificity, errors, and other defects as outlined in the grounds of this application.

He said the “search warrant did not specify the properties or items being searched for.”

Shaba stated that the officers failed to submit themselves for search as provided by the law before proceeding with the search.

“That the Magistrate did not specify the magisterial district wherein he sits.

“That during the invasion, the officers searched the applicant’s premises without lawful authority, seized personal items including documents and electronic devices, and caused the applicant undue humiliation, psychological trauma, and distress.

“Now shown to me and marked as ‘EXHIBIT B’ Is the list of the items carted away.

“That no items seized have been returned, and the respondents continue to rely on the unlawful evidence.

“That the applicant suffered violations of his constitutional rights as a result, and this application is brought in good faith to enforce same,” Shaba said.

President of the Africa Development Studies Centre, ADSC, Sir Victor Walsh Oluwafemi warmly congratulates the Director General of the Bureau of Public Procurement, Dr Adebowale Adedokun, the Honourable Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Lateef Fagbemi SAN, and the Federal Government of Nigeria under the leadership of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on the landmark arbitration victory against European Dynamics UK Ltd.

This was contained in a statement issued and signed by Sir Victor Walsh Oluwafemi, an International Development Expert, Reputation Architecture Strategist stating that:

“This decisive outcome is not merely a legal win. It is a governance statement.

“At a time when international contractors often assume that African institutions will capitulate under technical pressure, Nigeria has demonstrated maturity, institutional discipline and contractual courage.

“The dismissal of claims totalling over 6.2 million dollars signals a structural shift in how the country manages public-sector technology contracts.

“This is a defining moment in Nigeria’s procurement evolution, Oluwafemi asserted.

He explained that: “For years, procurement in many developing economies has been vulnerable to inflated milestone claims, loosely defined deliverables and weak enforcement of performance validation mechanisms.

“The tribunal’s affirmation of the centrality of User Acceptance Testing reinforces a fundamental principle: value must be delivered before value is paid for.

“That principle must now become doctrine. The Bureau of Public Procurement has sent a powerful message to the global contracting community that Nigeria will no longer accept distorted contractual interpretations, premature payment claims or technical shortcuts disguised as compliance. Payment must follow performance.

“Performance must be verifiable. Verification must be independent and rigorous.This is how institutions are built.

“The courage shown by Dr Adedokun in resisting premature settlement discussions reflects leadership rooted in fiduciary responsibility rather than convenience.

“The strategic coordination between the Bureau, the Attorney General’s office and Nigerian legal experts further demonstrates that domestic professional capacity can compete and prevail on the international stage.

“This victory should now catalyse a broader reform journey. Nigeria must seize this moment to institutionalise a new procurement architecture anchored on:

• Mandatory performance validated digital milestones

• Strengthened e-procurement oversight frameworks

• Independent technical audit layers embedded into contract execution

• Clear modular phase governance structures

• Structured risk allocation in technology contracting

“Through frameworks such as Policy as a Platform and Results as a Service, Nigeria can move beyond reactive dispute resolution into proactive procurement intelligence. The future of public procurement must be data-driven, performance-coded, and legally fortified.

“This arbitration win should mark the beginning of a national procurement renaissance.

“Let the journey of procurement reform begin in earnest. Let Nigeria’s e-procurement ecosystem evolve into a benchmark for transparency, accountability, and technical excellence across Africa. Let every contractor understand that Nigeria welcomes partnership but insists on performance.

“Today, Nigeria did not simply win a case. Nigeria strengthened its institutions. Nigeria protected public resources. Nigeria restored confidence in the architecture of public accountability.

“The Africa Development Studies Centre stands ready to support the Bureau of Public Procurement and relevant federal institutions in embedding these lessons into sustainable reform frameworks that will redefine public sector contracting for the digital age.

“The message is clear. Nigeria is no longer business as usual. The procurement reform era has begun,” Oluwafemi added.