By SCM Staff Writer
ABUJA, Nigeria — The Court of Appeal in Abuja has cleared Fidelity Bank Plc of liability in a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by Michael Kundera, overturning a previous judgment by the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court.
A three-judge panel led by Justice Adebukola Banjoko delivered the ruling on Sept. 14, 2026, granting Fidelity Bank’s appeal and setting aside the lower court’s finding of liability against the financial institution.
The dispute stems from suit number CV/6258/23, filed by Kundera to enforce his fundamental rights following his arrest and detention between May 15 and May 16, 2023. Kundera alleged that he was detained without being formally charged or granted administrative bail.
The respondents named in the suit included the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), former EFCC Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa, EFCC officer Calistus, and Fidelity Bank Plc.
In an April 2024 judgment, the FCT High Court, presided over by Justice Peter Kekemeke, ruled that Kundera’s arrest and detention were unlawful and violated his fundamental rights. The trial court ordered the respondents to jointly or severally pay Kundera ₦10 million in damages and an additional ₦2 million in legal costs.
Justice Kekemeke noted that Kundera, who was 75 years old at the time, should not have been subjected to such treatment, adding that repeated invitations and threats regarding a matter already adjudicated exceeded the respondents’ lawful powers.
Represented by counsel O. Orji, Kundera linked the dispute to a land parcel at the Foreign Affairs Quarters that he claimed lawfully belonged to him. He noted that the land matter was already pending before the appellate court in suit number CA/ABJ/CV/533/2021.
Among other reliefs, Kundera sought declarations that his detention violated Sections 35 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution, an order restraining further arrest threats, and ₦500 million in exemplary damages.
Fidelity Bank appealed the High Court ruling, arguing that no credible evidence linked the bank to Kundera’s arrest, detention, or rights violations.
The bank clarified that its involvement was strictly limited to submitting a petition to the EFCC regarding alleged criminal conduct by corporate entities that had obtained a ₦100 million loan for a specific project but reportedly diverted the funds. Fidelity Bank maintained that Kundera was not the target of its petition and could not be held responsible for actions taken against him.
Fidelity Bank asked the appellate court to evaluate whether the trial judge exercised proper discretion in granting monetary reliefs against the bank without supporting evidence.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the bank, ruling that no credible evidence existed before the trial court to prove Fidelity Bank infringed on Kundera’s rights. The panel held that Kundera failed to meet the required burden of proof, effectively absolving Fidelity Bank of liability and setting aside the financial penalties against it.
