Incarcerated immediate past governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, who is facing trial over the alleged unlawful interception of the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, was in Abuja on Monday granted N100 million bail.
As part of the stringent bail conditions, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik ordered the defendant to provide a surety who is a federal civil servant at or above Grade Level 17.
The court specified that the surety must reside in Abuja’s highbrow Maitama or Asokoro districts and deposit the original Certificate of Occupancy for a property valued at no less than the bail amount.
Additionally, the surety must provide three months of salary receipts, a bank manager’s authentication letter, an affidavit of means, a recent passport photograph, a departmental verification letter, and a six-month tax clearance certificate.
The defendant was further mandated to surrender his valid international passports and not travel out of the country without permission.
Justice Abdulmalik ordered the defendant to report to the headquarters of the Department of State Services (DSS) every last Friday of the month by 10 a.m. to sign an attendance register, pending the determination of the case.
The judge warned that failure to comply with any of the conditions would lead to an automatic revocation of the bail.
In addition, the former governor was directed to submit a letter of attestation from the chairman of the Kaduna Traditional Council, even as it ordered an accelerated hearing of the case.
El-Rufai, who was governor between 2015 and 2023 and also Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) under former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration, faces a five-count amended charge marked FHC/ABJ/99/2026.
The DSS alleged that he committed the crime with some people who are currently on the run.
It told the court that the defendant admitted on February 13, when he appeared as a guest on Arise TV Station’s Prime Time Programme in Abuja, that he aligned with others and unlawfully intercepted the phone communications of the NSA, thereby committing an offence contrary to and punishable under section 12(1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024.
The security agency further alleged that the defendant had, in the course of the television interview, stated that he knew and related to a certain individual who had unlawfully intercepted the NSA’s telephone communications without reporting the person to the relevant security agencies.
By failing to report the crime, El-Rufai was said to have committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 27 (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024.
It was also alleged that the defendant, while acting in cahoots with others that are still at large, used technical equipment that compromised public safety and national security and instilled reasonable apprehension of insecurity among Nigerians, following the unlawful interception of the NSA’s calls.
He was accused of committing an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 131(2) of the Nigerian Communications Act 2003.
Though the prosecution initially entered a three-count charge against the defendant, at the resumed proceedings on Thursday, it got the court’s nod to replace it with an amended charge.
El-Rufai is currently facing multiple cases in both Abuja and Kaduna State.
He had, in his reaction to what he described as an attempt by operatives of the DSS to “abduct” him at Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja on February 12, 2026, upon returning from Cairo, insisted that the security agency was being instigated by the ICPC, which he said had received a directive from the NSA, Ribadu, to detain him.
The former governor claimed the information got to him through someone who listened in on the NSA’s telephone conversations.
In a motion he filed to challenge his trial, El-Rufai gave 17 reasons why the charge marked: FHC/ABJ/CR/99/2026, which the DSS entered against him, should be quashed by the court.
Beyond challenging the charge as legally defective and incompetent, the former governor argued that the DSS cannot legally twist a “casual remark” from a television interview into a “confession” of phone-tapping.
He contended that his remarks on Arise TV do not qualify as a legal confession. For a statement to be admissible as such, he noted, it must be made voluntarily, under caution, and within the strict guidelines of Judges’ Rules.
El-Rufai maintained that his interview comments were simply part of a voluntary public discussion, lacking both the formal cautions and the protections typically given to suspects in custody.
“A casual remark in a television programme cannot be elevated to a judicial confession,” he asserted.
Author
Leave a comment