Court Orders El-Rufai to Enter Defence on Alleged Wiretapping Trial

The court has required former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai to present a defence if he so desires. This follows the prosecution’s completion of its evidence in a five-count case over alleged telephone wiretapping involving National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu. The order matters because the judge found the evidence sufficient to require El-Rufai’s response.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik issued the order after dismissing El-Rufai’s no-case submission. The prosecution called two witnesses: a DSS operative and lawyer Deji Adeyanju. Adeyanju testified that El-Rufai admitted during a television interview that he wiretapped Ribadu’s phone lines. Prosecutor Oluwole Aladedoye also pointed to Exhibit B, which he said contained an admission.

The order does not itself decide guilt. It moves the trial into the defence stage. El-Rufai may now challenge the prosecution’s evidence, provide his own account, or present other defence material. The judge adjourned the case until November 25 for him to open his defence.

A no-case submission is a request made after the prosecution closes its case. The defendant argues that the evidence, even taken at its strongest for the prosecution, does not establish a case requiring an answer. It is designed to prevent a trial from continuing when the prosecution has not shown enough evidence to proceed.

El-Rufai made this submission after prosecutors called two witnesses. His lawyer, Akinyemi Aremu, argued that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case and asked the court to discharge him. The prosecution disagreed and referred to Exhibit B and testimony about an alleged television admission.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik dismissed the submission. That means she found sufficient prosecution evidence for the trial to move forward. It does not mean the court has found El-Rufai guilty. He has been invited to present a defence, and the judge scheduled that stage for November 25.

The DSS brought a five-count criminal charge against Nasir El-Rufai. A count is one alleged criminal offence or charge within a case. The article does not identify each of the five counts, but it links the trial to alleged interference with National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu’s telephone communications.

The prosecution closed its case after calling two witnesses. One was an operative of the Department of State Services. The other was lawyer Deji Adeyanju, who appeared as a subpoenaed witness. Adeyanju testified that El-Rufai admitted during a television interview that he wiretapped Ribadu’s phone lines.

These figures describe the trial’s current stage, not the final outcome. The judge ruled that the evidence was sufficient for El-Rufai to enter a defence. The case therefore proceeds with the defendant’s response to the prosecution’s evidence, rather than ending after the no-case submission.

Once a prosecution closes its case, the defendant is given an opportunity to answer the allegations. In this case, the judge ruled that the evidence justified calling on El-Rufai to enter a defence. The next phase therefore concerns his response, not a new prosecution presentation.

El-Rufai may choose to present his defence if he wishes. His lawyer previously argued that the prosecution had not established a prima facie case. The prosecution relied on two witnesses, including Deji Adeyanju, who testified about an alleged television admission, and on Exhibit B, which prosecutors said contained an admission related to the alleged phone tapping.

The case was adjourned until November 25 for El-Rufai to open his defence. The ruling does not determine whether he is guilty. It means only that the prosecution’s evidence was sufficient for the trial to continue and for the defendant to answer the case.

Nasir El-Rufai is the defendant and a former Kaduna State governor. The DSS brought the five-count criminal case against him. Nuhu Ribadu, the National Security Adviser, is the person whose telephone communications the prosecution says were allegedly bugged. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik is the Federal High Court judge hearing the matter.

The prosecution, represented by Oluwole Aladedoye, presents evidence and argues that it has established a prima facie case. It relied on two witnesses and referred to Exhibit B. The DSS is the prosecuting agency identified in the article. Deji Adeyanju testified as a subpoenaed witness for the prosecution.

The defence is represented by Akinyemi Aremu. He adopted El-Rufai’s no-case submission and argued that the evidence was insufficient. The judge rules on legal applications, directs the trial, and sets dates. She dismissed the no-case submission and ordered a defence stage, without deciding guilt.

In a criminal trial, establishing a prima facie case means presenting evidence that, if left unanswered, could support the allegations. The court does not decide guilt at this point. It decides whether the prosecution has crossed the minimum evidentiary threshold for requiring the defendant to respond.

Here, prosecutor Oluwole Aladedoye argued that the prosecution had established such a case through two witnesses. He highlighted Exhibit B, which prosecutors claimed contained El-Rufai’s admission concerning the alleged tapping of Ribadu’s phone. Deji Adeyanju also testified about an alleged television admission by El-Rufai.

El-Rufai’s lawyer argued the opposite and asked the court to discharge him through a no-case submission. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik rejected that argument. Her ruling means the evidence is sufficient to move forward, not that El-Rufai has been convicted. The defendant now has the opportunity to challenge or answer the prosecution’s case.

Wiretapping means secretly listening to, recording, monitoring, or intercepting telephone communications. The article uses the term for the alleged tapping of National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu’s phone lines. Such conduct can become a criminal matter because communications may be protected by law, and unauthorized interception can invade privacy or breach official safeguards.

In this case, the DSS brought a five-count criminal charge against El-Rufai. Lawyer Deji Adeyanju testified that El-Rufai admitted during a television interview that he wiretapped Ribadu’s phone lines. The prosecution also referred to Exhibit B, which it said contained an admission related to the alleged tapping.

The court has not made a final finding that the alleged wiretapping occurred or that El-Rufai is guilty. Justice Joyce Abdulmalik only ruled that sufficient evidence existed to require a defence. The case now moves toward El-Rufai’s response, scheduled to open on November 25.