Investigative journalist Zainab Sodiq has filed a fundamental-rights enforcement suit before the Federal High Court in Abuja against the Attorney-General of the Federation, the Director-General of the State Security Service, the SSS and one of its operatives, Abdulwahab Habib, over her alleged unlawful arrest and detention.
Sodiq is demanding ₦4 billion in damages and the immediate return of several mobile phones and a DJI Mavic Air 2 drone allegedly seized from her by security operatives.
In the court processes, Sodiq alleged that her rights to personal liberty, human dignity, privacy, property, freedom of expression and fair hearing were violated during and after her detention at the SSS National Headquarters in Abuja.
She maintained that her arrest was founded on administrative directives referred to by the security agency as “NSA Extant Regulations,” rather than any written law enacted by the National Assembly.
According to her account, she was travelling from Lagos to Abuja when aviation security personnel intercepted her at the Murtala Muhammed International Airport over the DJI Mavic Air 2 drone in her possession.
She alleged that the aviation security officials handed her over to an SSS officer identified as Ifeanyi, who confiscated the drone and informed her that an End User Certificate was required for it.
The officer reportedly allowed her to continue her journey but directed her to retrieve the device from another security officer identified as Musa in Abuja.
Sodiq claimed that she later reported to the SSS office in Abuja on July 8, 2026, believing that she was going there to retrieve the seized drone and resolve the documentation issue.
She alleged that the invitation was a ruse and that she was arrested at gunpoint immediately after arriving at the premises.
According to the journalist, security operatives also approached the taxi waiting outside the facility and retrieved her personal belongings before taking her to the SSS National Headquarters.
She claimed that she was detained incommunicado from July 8 until July 10, denied prompt access to her family and questioned about her activities as an investigative journalist.
Sodiq alleged that she was eventually released without being formally charged before any court or informed of a specific criminal offence recognised under Nigerian law.
Despite her release, she claimed that the security agency continued to retain her professional and personal equipment.
She described the phones and drone as essential professional tools containing private information, journalistic materials, contacts and other data required for her work.
She described the phones and drone as essential professional tools containing private information, journalistic materials, contacts and other data required for her work.
The journalist argued that the continued seizure of the devices without a criminal charge, judicial authorisation or pending prosecution amounted to an unlawful interference with her rights to privacy, property and freedom of expression.
A central question raised in the suit concerns the legal status of the regulations cited by the SSS as authority for the arrest and confiscation of the drone.
Sodiq maintained that no Act of the National Assembly criminalises the mere possession or transportation of a commercially available drone without an End User Certificate.
She argued that while government agencies may make administrative regulations governing the acquisition, registration or operation of drones, such directives cannot independently create a criminal offence or authorise the detention of a citizen.
The applicant relied on Section 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, which provides that no person may be convicted of a criminal offence unless the offence is defined and the punishment prescribed in a written law.