Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a fundamental rights enforcement action filed by former Binance executive Tigran Gambaryan.
Gatekeepers News reports that the Binance executive had challenged his 2024 detention by the Office of National Security Adviser (NSA) and Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Delivering judgment on Thursday, Justice Mohammed Umar ruled that the application was an abuse of court process. He held that the NSA acted within its legal authority and that no court can halt investigative agencies from performing their statutory duties.
Gambaryan, Binance’s former head of financial crime compliance, filed the suit (FHC/ABJ/CS/356/2024) through his lawyer, Tonye Krukrubo, alleging unlawful and prolonged detention. He claimed the government was using him as leverage to continue making demands on Binance.
He said he travelled to Nigeria on February 26, 2024, with colleague Nadeem Anjarwalla after honouring an invitation from the NSA and EFCC but was taken into custody despite not being a director at the company. Anjarwalla later escaped and fled the country.
Krukrubo asked the court to declare the detention periods of February 26–27 and March 12–April 8, 2024, unlawful and to award damages and an apology.
However, lawyers for NSA and EFCC urged the court to strike out the case, arguing that it was aimed at disrupting a pending criminal trial (FHC/ABJ/CR/138/2024) involving money laundering and foreign exchange violations allegedly linked to Binance Holdings Ltd.
EFCC counsel Olanrewaju Adeola told the court that Gambaryan was held under a valid remand order and had already been arraigned before Justice Emeka Nwite, who denied him bail because he posed a flight risk.
In rejecting the suit, Justice Umar held that the court could not interfere with the prosecutorial powers of Nigerian authorities under the pretext of enforcing fundamental rights, especially where investigations into alleged money laundering and foreign exchange infractions are ongoing.
He added that while fundamental rights are constitutionally protected, they are not absolute and may be restricted in matters involving national security or active criminal cases. The court therefore dismissed the suit in its entirety.
