Tension mounts as El-Rufai challenges witness protection in NSA phone-tapping case
The former Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai was on Thursday arraigned before the Federal High Court in Abuja by the Department of State Services (DSS) over allegations bordering on unlawful interception of communications and threats to national security.
El-Rufai, who appeared before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, denied all five counts contained in the amended charge filed against him by the prosecution. The case was brought by counsel to the DSS, Oluwole Aladedoye (SAN), who informed the court that the earlier three-count charge had been replaced with an expanded five-count amended charge dated April 13, reports Gwg.com.
According to the prosecution, the amended charges include allegations that the former governor unlawfully intercepted communications linked to the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, without proper authorisation. He was also accused of engaging in activities involving technical systems that allegedly posed risks to public safety and national security.
El-Rufai, however, maintained his not-guilty plea when the charges were read in court.
At the proceedings, his counsel, Oluwole Iyamu (SAN), confirmed receipt of the amended charge and did not oppose its substitution for the earlier filing. The court subsequently struck out the initial three-count charge and proceeded with the new counts.
A key point of contention arose when the prosecution requested that the identities of two witnesses be protected through the use of pseudonyms, citing security concerns. The defence strongly objected, arguing that such a move would undermine the defendant’s constitutional right to fair hearing and to know his accusers.
The defence also challenged the prosecution’s request for consecutive hearing dates, stating that it could limit adequate access to legal representation, especially given El-Rufai’s ongoing custody under the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.
Additionally, the defence informed the court of a pending bail application, noting that an earlier missing affidavit had been recovered and submitted. While the prosecution did not oppose the bail request, it urged the court to dismiss a separate application filed by the defence seeking to quash the amended charge, describing it as lacking merit.
The defence further asked the court to compel the prosecution to disclose its proof of evidence to enable proper preparation for trial, but the request was also opposed.
After listening to submissions from both sides, Justice Abdulmalik adjourned the matter to May 18, 19, and 20 for hearing.
