No Evidence Against Bank – Appeal Court Clears Fidelity Bank in EFCC Arrest Dispute

No Evidence Against Bank – Appeal Court Clears Fidelity Bank in EFCC Arrest Dispute

By prince Benson Davies

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has cleared Fidelity Bank Plc of any liability in a fundamental rights enforcement suit filed by one Michael Kundera, setting aside the judgment of the Federal Capital Territory High Court which had found the bank jointly liable.

A three-member panel of the Court of Appeal led by Justice Adebukola Banjoko delivered judgment on September 14, 2026, allowing Fidelity Bank’s appeal and overturning the lower court’s decision against the bank.

The case originated from Suit No. CV/6258/23 filed by Michael Kundera to enforce his fundamental rights following his arrest and detention between May 15 and 16, 2023. Kundera alleged that he was detained without being charged to court or granted administrative bail.

Respondents in the suit included the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), former EFCC Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa, an EFCC officer identified as Calistus, and Fidelity Bank Plc.

In its judgment delivered in April 2024, the FCT High Court presided over by Justice Peter Kekemeke declared Kundera’s arrest and detention unlawful and a violation of his fundamental rights. The court ordered the respondents, jointly or severally, to pay N10 million as damages for the violation and an additional N2 million as cost of the action.

The trial judge had observed that Kundera, who was said to be 75 years old at the time, should not have been subjected to such treatment, adding that continued invitations and threats of arrest over a matter already decided exceeded lawful bounds.

Through his counsel, O. Orji, Kundera linked the dispute to a parcel of land at the Foreign Affairs Quarters which he claimed lawfully belonged to him. He also contended that the land matter was already pending before the Court of Appeal in Suit No. CA/ABJ/CV/533/2021. He sought declarations that his arrest and detention violated his rights under Sections 35 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution, an order restraining further invitations or threats, and N500 million as exemplary and aggravated damages.

Fidelity Bank challenged the High Court’s decision at the Court of Appeal, arguing that there was no credible evidence linking the bank to Kundera’s arrest, detention or alleged rights violation.

The bank explained that its only involvement was a petition submitted to the EFCC concerning alleged criminal conduct by legal entities that obtained a N100 million loan procurement order for a specific project but allegedly diverted the funds for personal use. It maintained that Kundera was not the subject of the petition and therefore there was no basis for holding the bank liable for the alleged rights infringement.

The bank asked the appellate court to determine whether the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in granting reliefs against it without sufficient material evidence establishing its involvement.

In its judgment, the Court of Appeal upheld Fidelity Bank’s argument. The panel held that there was no credible evidence before the trial court establishing that Fidelity Bank infringed Kundera’s fundamental rights. The court further held that Kundera failed to discharge the burden of proof required to establish wrongdoing against the bank and to justify the reliefs granted.

Consequently, the appellate court reversed the finding of liability against Fidelity Bank and cleared the bank of responsibility for the alleged fundamental rights violation.