Tigran Gambaryan, a detained executive at Binance, has taken legal action against the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, and the Economic Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), alleging a breach of his fundamental human rights.
In a bold move, Gambaryan filed an originating motion, asserting that his detention and the confiscation of his travel documents violate Section 35 (1) and (4) of the 1999 Constitution (As Amended).
He is adamant in his plea for the court to intervene, demanding immediate release from custody and the prompt return of his passport.
Central to his petition is the call for an order of perpetual injunction, barring the respondents and their agents from further detaining him in connection to any investigations or demands related to Binance.
Additionally, Gambaryan seeks redress through a public apology from the defendants for the alleged infringement of his rights.
Gambaryan’s narrative underscores his innocence, portraying himself as a cooperative participant in the Nigerian authorities’ inquiries into Binance activities within the country.
He contends that he attended meetings at the behest of the NSA and EFCC to address pertinent issues, alongside the now-fleeing Nadeem Anjarwalla.
Crucially, Gambaryan maintains that he neither committed any offense during these discussions nor received written notification of any alleged transgressions while in Nigeria. His portrayal of events paints a picture of compliance and cooperation, adding weight to his assertion of wrongful detainment.
During the recent court proceedings, Counsel to the plaintiffs, T.J. Krukrubo, apprised the court that the respondents had been duly served with the legal documents.
However, in a surprising turn of events, Krukrubo announced his withdrawal from representing the fleeing Anjarwalla in the matter, leaving observers speculating about the reasons behind this abrupt decision.
Gambaryan’s legal battle against the NSA and EFCC underscores the complexities surrounding jurisdiction, due process, and the protection of individual rights in matters involving international entities.
As the case unfolds, it serves as a poignant reminder of the delicate balance between security concerns and the preservation of civil liberties, with Gambaryan’s plight emblematic of the broader tensions inherent in such high-stakes legal disputes.
