The trial of former Nasir El-Rufai on charges bordering on alleged treason and threats to national security resumed on Tuesday at the Federal High Court in Abuja, with prosecutors presenting fresh testimony over an allegedly intercepted private conversation involving Nigeria’s national security adviser.
A prosecution witness told the court that Nuhu Ribadu and the chairman of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission both confirmed the authenticity of a conversation referenced by El-Rufai during a televised interview on Arise Television.
During proceedings, prosecutors played a 43-minute broadcast in which the former Kaduna governor allegedly claimed that a private discussion involving Ribadu had been intercepted and sent to him.
El-Rufai is facing an amended five-count charge linked to the alleged unlawful interception of communications involving the NSA, an act the Federal Government argues breached provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024 and posed risks to national security.
According to the witness, investigators later interviewed Ribadu, who reportedly confirmed that the conversation cited during the interview had taken place between him and the ICPC chairman. The anti-corruption agency’s chairman also allegedly acknowledged the discussion after portions of the broadcast were replayed to him by investigators.
In excerpts aired before the court, El-Rufai was said to have defended the alleged interception, arguing that governments routinely monitor communications as part of intelligence operations.
The prosecution further disclosed that the programme’s anchor, Charles Aniagolu, activist-lawyer Deji Adeyanju and a cameraman attached to the station were all invited for questioning during the investigation.
Investigators told the court that Aniagolu confirmed El-Rufai had stated during the interview that the conversation was intercepted and forwarded to him, while also maintaining that such practices were commonplace among governments.
Statements obtained from Aniagolu and Adeyanju were admitted into evidence without objection from the defence as Exhibits C, C1 and E.
Another statement from Ugochukwu Agalayana, an Arise TV cameraman, was admitted as Exhibit D after he confirmed setting up the recording equipment used during the interview, although he said he paid little attention to the discussion itself.
The prosecution witness said investigators concluded from the interview that El-Rufai had made what they described as an “open confession” concerning the interception of the NSA’s conversation, adding that the team considered the alleged act capable of undermining national security.
A preliminary investigation report tendered by the prosecution was admitted as Exhibit F.
Under cross-examination, however, defence counsel, Chief Paul Erokoro (SAN), pressed the witness over the absence of forensic evidence linking El-Rufai to any interception activity.
The witness admitted investigators did not examine any communication devices belonging to Ribadu, obtain IP addresses or conduct forensic analysis related to the alleged interception.
He maintained, however, that such steps were deemed unnecessary after Ribadu reportedly confirmed the authenticity of the conversation referenced during the television interview.
The witness also conceded that El-Rufai never explicitly claimed during the broadcast that he personally intercepted the conversation.
Despite this, the prosecution insisted the former governor repeatedly affirmed that the discussion had been tapped and transmitted to him.
When asked whether El-Rufai may simply have been engaging in political rhetoric during a heated television appearance, the witness replied that he regarded the former governor “as a man of integrity” and believed he meant what he said.
Following the conclusion of cross-examination, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik adjourned further hearing in the matter until 22 and 23 June.
