KC Luxury’s Detention Battle Deepens As Court Fixes New Date

The Federal High Court in Lagos has adjourned proceedings in the detention case involving businessman and social media influencer Afolabi Kazeem Michael, popularly known as KC Luxury, to September 21, 2026.

According to Ireporter Online, Justice Friday Ogazi fixed the date on Wednesday to allow the parties to await the decision of a sister court on an application challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the matter.

KC Luxury’s lawyer, Abdulakeem Labi-Lawal, SAN, told the court that the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) had obtained an order authorising his client’s detention for 30 days to facilitate further investigation.

However, the defence argued that the order did not expressly require Kazeem to remain in custody for the entire period. Labi-Lawal also maintained that the NDLEA could release his client on bail if the agency was satisfied with the progress of its investigation.

The lawyer said Kazeem had already challenged the jurisdiction of the court to issue the detention order, adding that the application had been argued and the parties were awaiting the ruling.

He therefore asked Justice Ogazi to adjourn the matter to enable the defence respond to processes filed by the respondents. He noted that the respondents had served their counter-affidavit on the defence team, giving the applicant five days to respond.

Counsel to the NDLEA, Abu Ibrahim, did not oppose the request for an adjournment. He, however, informed the court that the 30-day remand order was obtained in August, before Kazeem approached the court seeking an order for his production.

Justice Ogazi subsequently adjourned the matter until September 21 for further proceedings.

Kazeem, through his legal team led by Labi-Lawal, is challenging an August 20, 2026, ex parte order that authorised the NDLEA to keep him in custody for 30 days while investigating alleged drug trafficking offences.

In Suit No. FHC/LAG/MISC/1199/2026, the defence is asking the court to set aside or discharge the detention order, arguing that no criminal charge has been filed against the businessman.

The lawyers contended that the Federal High Court’s jurisdiction to try offences under the NDLEA Act is distinct from its authority to issue a pre-charge remand order.

According to the defence, the court’s power to hear drug-related offences does not automatically confer authority to remand an individual who has not been charged merely to give investigators additional time to conclude their investigation.

“The jurisdiction to try a person charged with an offence under the NDLEA Act is fundamentally different from the jurisdiction to remand a suspect who has not yet been charged,” the lawyers submitted.

The defence also challenged the legality of the 30-day detention period, relying on provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015.

The lawyers cited Sections 293 to 299 of the legislation, which provide the framework for pre-charge remand applications. They specifically relied on Section 296(1), which they argued limits an initial remand order to a maximum of 14 days.

According to the defence, the provision does not permit the court to substitute the 14-day limit with a single 30-day detention order.

They further argued that where investigators require additional time to keep a suspect in custody, the matter should be subjected to further judicial review rather than relying on a single 30-day order.

Kazeem’s legal team has also asked the court to expedite the hearing of the application and bring forward the September 17 date previously fixed for the review of his detention.

The lawyers maintained that allowing the detention to continue could violate Kazeem’s constitutional right to personal liberty and potentially undermine the effectiveness of his challenge to the remand order.