|By Adejumo Adekunle
The Department of State Services (DSS) has formally arraigned former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, slamming him with a five-count amended charge bordering on alleged threats to national security.
El-Rufai appeared before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik at the Federal High Court in Abuja, where he firmly rejected all charges, entering a not guilty plea.
At the hearing, DSS counsel, Oluwole Aladedoye, SAN, pushed for the adoption of a newly amended charge filed on April 13, 2026, replacing an earlier three-count charge. The court swiftly struck out the previous charges after the defence confirmed receipt and raised no objections.
However, courtroom tension escalated when the prosecution sought three consecutive trial dates, a move fiercely challenged by defence counsel, Oluwole Iyamu, SAN. Iyamu argued that such scheduling would hinder access to his client, who had been in the custody of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), potentially compromising adequate legal preparation.
The defence also pressed forward its bail application initially filed in February, which the DSS did not oppose—raising expectations that the former governor may regain temporary freedom pending trial.
In a dramatic twist, the DSS requested the court to shield the identities of two key witnesses, citing fears that their lives—and those of their families—could be endangered by alleged sympathisers of El-Rufai. The agency urged the court to allow the use of pseudonyms and exclude their names from public records.
But the defence swiftly countered, insisting that such a move would violate El-Rufai’s constitutional right to confront his accusers. Iyamu dismissed the claims of threats as baseless, stressing that there was no evidence linking his client to any form of intimidation or violent network.
The defence further warned that granting anonymity could tilt the scales of justice unfairly, creating prejudice against the accused.
Adding another layer to the legal battle, El-Rufai’s team demanded full access to the prosecution’s evidence to prepare its case, while also filing an application to quash the charges entirely. The prosecution, however, resisted, arguing that some requested documents were irrelevant to the case.
The high-profile trial now sets the stage for a legal showdown that could have far-reaching political implications, as Nigeria edges closer to the 2027 general elections.
