Spread the word
A Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed a no-case submission filed by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai in his trial over the alleged unlawful interception of telephone communications involving National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, and ordered him to enter his defence.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, in a ruling on Monday, held that the Department of State Services (DSS), which is prosecuting the case, had presented sufficient evidence to warrant calling on the former governor to respond to the allegations. Blueprint reports
The judge adjourned the case until November 25, 2026, for the defence stage of the trial, in which El-Rufai is facing a five-count amended charge.
The ruling followed arguments by the prosecution and defence over whether the evidence presented by the DSS was sufficient to require the former governor to defend himself.
The decision means the trial will proceed beyond the prosecution’s case, but it does not amount to a finding of guilt against El-Rufai, who has pleaded not guilty to the charges.
‘Why El-Rufai’s no-case submission failed’
El-Rufai filed the no-case submission after the DSS closed its case in June, having called two witnesses to testify against him.
Through his legal team, the former governor urged the court to discharge and acquit him, arguing that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case requiring him to enter a defence.
A no-case submission is an application asking the court to terminate a criminal trial at the close of the prosecution’s case on the ground that the evidence presented is insufficient to justify requiring the defendant to respond.
However, prosecution counsel, Oluwole Aladedoye, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), opposed the application, arguing that the evidence before the court was sufficient to sustain the charges and required El-Rufai to enter his defence.
During the proceedings, the prosecution specifically drew the court’s attention to Exhibit B, which it said contained an alleged admission by the former governor concerning the interception of Ribadu’s telephone communications.
Aladedoye argued that the defence had failed to adequately address the evidence and urged the judge to reject the application.
Justice Abdulmalik agreed that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence for the trial to continue, dismissing the no-case submission and directing El-Rufai to open his defence if he so wished.
What the prosecution witnesses told the court
The DSS called two witnesses before announcing the closure of its case.
One was a DSS operative, identified in court by the code name APC, who testified about the agency’s handling of the recording of El-Rufai’s television interview.
The second witness was lawyer and human rights activist Deji Adeyanju, who testified after being summoned to appear before the court.
Adeyanju told the court that he was present at the Arise Television studio in Abuja when El-Rufai appeared on the Prime Time programme in February 2026.
He testified about statements made during the interview concerning the interception of telephone conversations linked to Ribadu. The court also viewed a recording of the programme.
During cross-examination, Adeyanju said he heard El-Rufai state, “we listened to their calls”. He acknowledged, however, that the former governor did not expressly say that he had personally tapped the NSA’s telephone.
The distinction is central to the defence’s challenge because the prosecution must establish the allegations contained in the charge through admissible evidence.
The prosecution relied on the testimony and documentary evidence to argue that El-Rufai had a case to answer, while the defence maintained that the evidence did not meet the required threshold.
The judge’s ruling allows the proceedings to continue so the allegations can be tested further during the defence stage.
How the case originated
The case followed comments El-Rufai made during an interview on Arise Television in February 2026, after security operatives reportedly attempted to arrest him at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja.
The former governor had returned from Cairo, Egypt, when the reported airport incident occurred. He subsequently alleged that Ribadu was behind the attempted arrest and said he knew about the alleged instruction through an intercepted telephone conversation.
During the television interview, El-Rufai claimed that someone had wiretapped the NSA’s telephone, allowing him to listen to a conversation in which Ribadu allegedly instructed security operatives to arrest him.
The allegation triggered public controversy and was followed by the DSS prosecution.
The Federal Government subsequently filed a five-count amended charge against the former governor, relating to the alleged unlawful interception of telephone communications and other associated offences.
The charges cite provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act, as amended in 2024, and the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003.
El-Rufai pleaded not guilty when he was arraigned in April 2026.
The prosecution’s case has focused on the circumstances surrounding the alleged interception and the statements made during the television interview, while the defence has challenged the sufficiency of the evidence against him.
El-Rufai remains on bail in wiretapping case
The court had earlier granted El-Rufai bail in the sum of ₦100 million, subject to conditions.
Subsequently, the former governor asked the court to vary the bail terms, but the application was rejected.
The dispute over bail conditions has been a separate aspect of the proceedings from the question of whether the prosecution presented sufficient evidence to require a defence.
The rejection of the no-case submission does not, in itself, determine whether the former governor will be convicted. The prosecution must still establish its case in accordance with the law, while the defence is entitled to challenge the evidence and present its own case.
The November 25 hearing is expected to provide the next indication of how El-Rufai intends to respond to the allegations.
Former governor faces separate legal battles
The wiretapping trial is one of several legal proceedings involving El-Rufai following his departure from office as Kaduna State governor in May 2023.
He is also facing corruption-related proceedings initiated by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) over allegations linked to his administration in Kaduna State.
One of the cases concerns an alleged ₦8.68 billion CCTV surveillance contract awarded during his tenure. The allegations involve questions surrounding procurement procedures and the handling of the contract.
El-Rufai and other defendants have faced allegations in connection with the matter, which remains separate from the wiretapping case and is subject to its own judicial process.
The former governor has also instituted fundamental rights suits against security and anti-corruption agencies over actions taken against him.
In a separate development, an FCT High Court presided over by Justice Sylvanus Oriji dismissed his ₦120 million fundamental rights suit against the DSS, ICPC, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and the Attorney-General of the Federation.
The suit challenged actions including invitations for questioning, an alleged attempt to arrest him at the airport and the seizure of his passport. The court held that the agencies’ actions, as considered in the case, did not violate his fundamental rights and awarded ₦200,000 in costs against each respondent.
That judgment did not determine the merits of the wiretapping allegations, which remain before Justice Abdulmalik.
What happens next?
With the no-case submission dismissed, El-Rufai is expected to enter his defence when the Federal High Court resumes on November 25.
At that stage, he may respond to the prosecution’s evidence, challenge the interpretation of statements attributed to him and present evidence or call witnesses in support of his position, subject to the applicable rules of criminal procedure.
If he chooses not to present a defence, the court will have to determine the case on the evidence already before it and in accordance with the law.
The central issue remains whether the prosecution can establish the alleged offences beyond reasonable doubt.
For now, the court has ruled only that the evidence presented is sufficient to require the case to proceed. The final determination of El-Rufai’s guilt or innocence will depend on the evidence and arguments considered at the conclusion of the trial.
Spread the word