By Teddy Nwanunobi
The prosecution in the trial of former Kaduna State Governor, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai, has alleged that unruly conduct of some members of the defendant’s family, who allegedly made unfounded allegations against the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC) necessitated the decision to relocate him is the reason behind el-Rufai’s relocation from the custody of the ICPC to the facility of the Department of State Services (DSS).
The prosecuting lawyer, Oluwole Aladedoye, SAN, offered the explanation before a Federal High Court shortly after the day’s proceedings resumed on Tuesday.
The DSS is prosecuting the defendant on a five-count charge in which he is among others, accused of admitting in a television interview that he intercepted the phone conversations of the National Security Adviser (NSA), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu.
Aladedoye noted an incident on May 15 when one of El-Rufai’s wives allegedly arrived at the ICPC facility with cameramen and began livestreaming claims that her husband was being denied food and access to family members.
He claimed that a politician, Timi Frank, equally published claims suggesting that El-Rufai could be harmed in custody, developments which informed the decision to move him to DSS custody to avoid further controversy.
Aladedoye also accused members of his family of allegedly weaponizing the media and attempting to incite public opinion against the Judiciary over his detention and the conditions attached to the bail granted him on Monday.
He said El-Rufai’s relatives have repeatedly used the social media and press engagements to portray the prosecution and security agencies as persecuting the defendant.
Aladedoye said the situation escalated when members of the defendant’s family, including his two wives and a son, went to the DSS headquarters with journalists and publicly criticized the court’s bail conditions.
He added that rather than explore the legal channels, the family resorted to media campaigns capable of undermining public confidence in the Judiciary.
Aladedoye urged the court to caution the defendant and his family members against further public attacks, noting that the case before the court was a criminal prosecution and not a political persecution.
In his response, defence lawyer, E. E. Ekere denied being aware of the allegations made by Aladedoye.
Ekere said the defendant should not be held responsible for comments allegedly made outside the courtroom.
He assured that the defence would advise family members and sympathizers to exercise restraint.
Commenting, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik said she pays no attention to social media narratives.
Abdulmalik said issues circulating online should be left outside courtroom proceedings.
Aladedoye later tendered a flash drive and a certificate of compliance, as a replacement for the one that had challenges the previous day, which the court admitted in evidence.
Following that, the judge directed that the flash drive, containing a recording of an interview granted by El-Rufai to Arise TV be played.
In the recorded video of the 43-minute long interview the defendant allegedly stated that someone had wiretapped a conversation involving the National Security Adviser (NSA) and forwarded it to him.
In the interview, El-Rufai made efforts to justify the act by arguing that governments routinely monitor communications.
The first prosecution witness (PW1), identified as APC, who started giving evidence on Monday, continued on Tuesday.
The witness told the court that shortly after the interview was aired, investigators interviewed the National Security Adviser, who verbally confirmed that the conversation referenced by El-Rufai had indeed taken place between him and the Chairman of the ICPC.
He added that the ICPC Chairman also confirmed having such a discussion with the NSA after portions of the interview were played to him.
The witness said the anchor of the programme, Charles Aniagolu, a lawyer, Deji Adeyanju, and a cameraman were invited for questioning.
The witness said Aniagolu confirmed that El-Rufai admitted during the interview that someone intercepted the conversations and passed it to him, while also insisting that governments engage in such practices regularly.
Aladedoye later tendered statements obtained from Aniagolu and Adeyanju, which were admitted by the court in evidence, without opposition from the defence.
The court also admitted another statement made by an Arise TV cameraman, Ugochukwu Agalayana.
The witness said investigators concluded that El-Rufai made what they described as an “open confession” during the television interview regarding the interception of the NSA’s conversation.
He added that the investigation team considered the act capable of undermining national security and subsequently recommended prosecution.
The prosecution further rendered a preliminary investigation report, which the court also admitted.
While being cross-examined by another defence lawyer (who took over from Ekere), Paul Erokoro (SAN), the witness said he did not examine any communication devices belonging to the NSA, obtain IP addresses, or conduct forensic analysis of the alleged interception.
The witness such steps were no longer necessary after the NSA confirmed the authenticity of the conversation referenced in the interview.
He said El-Rufai did not specifically state, during the interview, that he personally carried out the interception, but insisted that the former governor repeatedly stood by the claim that the conversation had been tapped and forwarded to him.
On whether the defendant could merely have been boasting as a politician during a politically charged television appearance, the witness said he considered El-Rufai as a person of integrity and believed he meant what he said during the broadcast.
Abdulmalik, subsequently, adjourned further hearing till June 22 and 23, 2026.