The Division of State Providers on Thursday arraigned former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai earlier than the Federal Excessive Court docket in Abuja on a five-count amended cost bordering on alleged illegal interception of communications and breach of nationwide safety.
El-Rufai, who appeared earlier than Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, pleaded not responsible to all of the counts.
On the resumed proceedings, DSS counsel, Oluwole Aladedoye (SAN), knowledgeable the courtroom that the matter was fastened for the defendant to take his plea, including {that a} additional amended five-count cost was filed on April 13.
He urged the courtroom to substitute the sooner three-count cost with the amended one.
Depend 4 of the amended prices reads “That you just, Mallam Nasir El Rufai, grownup, male, deliberately and with out authorization, intercepted the communications of the Nationwide Safety Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, as admitted by you on 13 February, 2026, whereas showing as a visitor on Come up TV Station’s Prime Time Programme in Abuja, throughout the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court docket, and thereby dedicated an offence opposite to and punishable beneath Part 12(1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, and many others) Modification Act, 2024.”
Depend 5 reads, “That you just, Mallam Nasir El Rufai, grownup, male and different, nonetheless at giant, someday in 2026, in Abuja, throughout the jurisdiction of this Honorable, did use technical tools or programs that compromised public security and nationwide safety and instilled cheap apprehension of insecurity amongst Nigerians by unlawfully intercepting the communications of the Nationwide Safety Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, to which you admitted throughout an interview on 13 February, 2026, on Come up TV Station’s Prime Time Programme in Abuja, and thereby dedicated an offense opposite to and punishable beneath Part 131(2) of the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003.”
Counsel to the defendant, Oluwole Iyamu (SAN), confirmed he had been served with the amended cost and indicated that he was not opposing the substitution.
Sponsored
Following the appliance, the courtroom struck out the sooner three-count cost and proceeded to learn the amended counts to the previous governor, who once more entered a “not responsible” plea.
The prosecution thereafter utilized for 3 consecutive trial dates. Nonetheless, the defence objected, arguing that the defendant’s entry to counsel could possibly be constrained attributable to his custody beneath the Impartial Corrupt Practices and Different Associated Offences Fee.
The defence additionally knowledgeable the courtroom of a pending bail software filed on February 17, noting {that a} additional affidavit was initially lacking from the case file earlier than it was later situated throughout proceedings.
The DSS, nevertheless, acknowledged that it didn’t oppose the bail software.
In a separate software, the prosecution sought an order to hide the identities of two witnesses, requesting that their names be excluded from public courtroom data and changed with pseudonyms, citing security considerations for his or her households.
The defence opposed the appliance, arguing that it infringed on the constitutional proper of an accused particular person to know his accusers and that no proof had been introduced to justify fears of focused assaults.
The defence additional urged the courtroom to compel the prosecution to reveal proof of proof to allow sufficient trial preparation, an software the prosecution additionally opposed, describing it as unrelated to the filed processes.
SPONSORED