Maina said the EFCC, the INTERPOL, and other respondents' acts of alleged intimidation, harassment and detention flouted his rights to fair hearing.
In the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1174/2017, Maina argued that EFCC's publication of his name and picture in a newspaper advertisement on November 7, 2017, declaring him wanted, was a violation of his rights to dignity of person.
Trouble began for the pension boss when it came to light that he was reinstated into the federal civil service last year after he allegedly fled the country two years before following a corruption scandal.
The EFCC had accused him and others of looting about N2.1 billion pension funds in 2013.
He was subsequently sacked from the civil service and declared wanted by the EFCC.
After his controversial reinstatement last year, the Commission declared him wanted again in an advertisement which had both his name and picture, published in a newspaper on November 7, 2017.
In the suit, Maina said the EFCC, the International Police, and other respondents' acts of alleged intimidation, harassment, threats of arrest and detention flouted his rights to personal liberty and fair hearing.
He sought an order of mandatory injunction restraining the respondents from further making such publication against him.
He also asked the court to make an order restraining the respondents from further intimidating, harassing, arresting and detaining him.
Maina further demanded N500 million as damages for the respondents' previous acts of violation of his rights.
He aslo demanded an order directing the EFCC to apologise to him in three national dailies for its newspaper advertisements declaring him wanted on November 7, 2017.
The respondents to the suit are the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami (SAN); the EFCC; the Inspector-General of Police, Mr. Ibrahim Idris; the Commissioner of Police, Interpol and the Nigerian Immigration Service.
Maina's lead counsel, O. J. Onyemah, anchored the suit, filed last December on seven grounds, one of which was that there was no legal justification for declaring his client wanted.
He argued that there was no law empowering any of the respondents to advertise/publish or parade Maina’s name and picture "as a criminal" when the plaintiff had not been tried or convicted by any court.