Reported by Weng Patrick Atokor l Journalist at Weng Global
The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja has overturned a Federal Capital Territory High Court decision that held Fidelity Bank Plc liable in a fundamental rights case involving the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
A three-member panel led by Justice Adebukola Banjoko delivered judgment on September 14, 2026, allowing Fidelity Bank’s appeal and reversing the lower court’s decision.
The case followed a suit filed by Michael Kundera over his arrest and detention in May 2023. The FCT High Court, presided over by Justice Peter Kekemeke, had previously found that Kundera’s fundamental rights were violated and ordered Fidelity Bank, the EFCC and former EFCC Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa to pay N10 million.
What the original case was about
Kundera’s case arose from his arrest and detention between May 15 and May 16, 2023.
He had argued that he was detained without being charged before a court or released on bail. The dispute was also connected to a parcel of land at the Foreign Affairs Quarters in Abuja, which Kundera claimed belonged to him.
In April 2024, Justice Kekemeke ruled that the arrest and detention amounted to a violation of Kundera’s fundamental rights. The court ordered the respondents to pay N10 million, jointly or severally, and also awarded N2 million as costs of the action.
The ruling placed Fidelity Bank alongside the EFCC and other respondents in the case.
Fidelity Bank subsequently challenged the decision at the Court of Appeal, arguing that the evidence before the trial court did not establish that the bank had infringed Kundera’s constitutional rights.
Fidelity Bank’s argument
In its appeal, Fidelity Bank argued that its involvement in the matter stemmed from a petition it submitted to the EFCC concerning alleged criminal conduct involving legal entities that had obtained a N100 million loan procurement order from the bank for a specific project.
The bank maintained that the funds were allegedly diverted for personal use and that Kundera was not the subject of its petition.
According to the arguments considered by the appellate court, Fidelity Bank therefore disputed the basis for holding it responsible for the alleged violation of Kundera’s rights.
The bank also argued that there was insufficient evidence before the lower court to establish a connection between its actions and any infringement of Kundera’s constitutionally protected rights.
Court of Appeal reverses the lower court
The Court of Appeal agreed with Fidelity Bank’s position.
The three-member panel found that there was no credible evidence before the trial court establishing that the bank had infringed Kundera’s fundamental rights.
The appellate court also held that Kundera had not discharged the burden of proof required to establish wrongdoing by Fidelity Bank sufficient to justify the reliefs granted by the lower court.
The decision consequently reversed the finding of liability against Fidelity Bank.
The ruling does not erase the fact that the FCT High Court had previously reached a different conclusion based on the evidence before it at the trial stage. Rather, the Court of Appeal’s judgment represents the appellate court’s determination of Fidelity Bank’s challenge to that decision.
The wider legal context
The case highlights the importance of establishing a clear evidentiary link between a respondent’s actions and an alleged infringement of fundamental rights in constitutional rights-enforcement proceedings.
At the trial court, Kundera had challenged the circumstances surrounding his arrest and detention. The lower court found in his favour and imposed financial liability on the respondents.
The Court of Appeal subsequently examined Fidelity Bank’s role and the evidence relied upon to establish liability against the bank.
Its decision means the earlier finding against Fidelity Bank has been overturned at the appellate level.
The case also demonstrates how decisions of lower courts can be challenged through Nigeria’s appellate system, with higher courts empowered to review whether legal and evidentiary requirements were properly applied.
What happens next
The Court of Appeal judgment delivered on September 14, 2026, has reversed the FCT High Court’s finding against Fidelity Bank in the fundamental rights case.
Available reports on the judgment do not indicate any further development beyond the appellate court’s decision. Any subsequent legal action or further appeal would depend on the parties and the applicable appellate process.
For now, the Court of Appeal’s ruling removes the liability previously imposed on Fidelity Bank by the FCT High Court in the case.
Why the ruling matters
The decision is significant because it clarifies, at the appellate level, the distinction between an organisation’s involvement in reporting alleged criminal conduct to law-enforcement authorities and liability for a subsequent alleged violation of an individual’s constitutional rights.
The Court of Appeal’s finding, as reported by multiple Nigerian outlets, was that the evidence did not establish the required connection between Fidelity Bank and the alleged infringement of Kundera’s fundamental rights.
The case therefore provides another example of the role of appellate courts in reviewing findings made by trial courts, particularly where a party argues that the evidence did not support the relief granted.
Weng Global – Stories beyond borders
Sources
- Court of Appeal judgment and background to the case.
- Report on the September 14, 2026 appellate judgment.
- Additional report on the Court of Appeal decision.
- Background on the 2024 FCT High Court ruling.
- Report on the original N10 million rights ruling.
