Fidelity Bank Wins Appeal in Rights Case

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has cleared Fidelity Bank Plc of any blame in a rights case involving Michael Kundera. This decision overturned an earlier ruling from the Federal Capital Territory High Court.

A three-member panel led by Justice Adebukola Banjoko made the ruling on 14 September. They accepted Fidelity Bank’s appeal and reversed the lower court's finding that the bank was liable.

The case began with suit number CV/6258/23, filed by Michael Kundera. He sought to enforce his rights after he was arrested and detained between 15 and 16 May 2023. Kundera claimed he was held without being charged or granted bail.

The respondents in the case included the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, former EFCC Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa, an EFCC officer named Calistus, and Fidelity Bank Plc.

In April 2024, the FCT High Court, led by Justice Peter Kekemeke, ruled that Michael Kundera’s arrest and detention were unlawful. The court found it violated his rights and ordered the respondents to pay him ₦10 million for the violation and an extra ₦2 million for legal costs.

The trial judge noted that Michael Kundera was 75 years old at the time and should not have experienced such treatment. The court said that repeated invitations and threats against him on a matter already decided went beyond what was lawful.

Through his lawyer, O. Orji, Michael Kundera linked the case to a piece of land at the Foreign Affairs Quarters, claiming it rightfully belonged to him. He also mentioned that this issue was already pending in the Court of Appeal under suit number CA/ABJ/CV/533/2021. He sought various reliefs, including declarations that his arrest and detention violated his rights under Sections 35 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution. He also wanted an order to stop further threats of arrest and ₦500 million in damages.

Fidelity Bank challenged the High Court’s ruling. They argued that there was no solid evidence connecting them to Michael Kundera’s arrest and detention or any violation of his rights.

The bank explained that their role was limited to a petition sent to the EFCC about allegations of wrongdoing by companies that had taken a ₦100 million loan for a project but allegedly misused the funds. They maintained that Michael Kundera was not the subject of this petition, so there was no reason to hold the bank accountable for any rights violation.

Fidelity Bank asked the appellate court to see if the trial judge had properly used his judgment in granting relief against the bank without enough evidence of its involvement or liability.

The Court of Appeal agreed with the bank. The panel found no credible evidence showing that Fidelity Bank had violated Michael Kundera’s rights. They also stated that Kundera did not meet the burden of proof needed to show wrongdoing by the bank and justify the relief granted against it.

The appellate court’s decision overturned the earlier finding of liability against Fidelity Bank and cleared the bank of any responsibility for the alleged rights violation.