Phone-Tapping Charge: DSS can’t try me over ‘casual remarks’ on TV, El-Rufai tells court

2026-02-24 - 16:17

.... seeks discharge order, N2bn damages By Ikechukwu Nnochiri ABUJA– The detained former Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, has filed before the Federal High Court in Abuja, 17 reasons why he cannot be prosecuted for allegedly intercepting phone communications of the National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu. In the motion on notice he filed through his team of lawyers led by Mr. Oluwole Iyamu, the embattled ex-governor, who is scheduled for arraignment on Wednesday, asked the court to quash the three-count charge the Department of State Services (DSS) preferred against him. He argued that the charge marked FHC/ABJ/CR/99/2026 was not only incompetent and legally defective, but constituted a misuse of the judicial process for a political witch-hunt. According to him, the DSS has no legal backing to elevate a “casual remark” he made during a television interview to “a confession” that he had indeed tapped the NSA’s telephone line as alleged. He argued that the statement he made on Arise TV did not constitute a confessional statement in law, saying for a statement to be admissible as a confession, “it must be made under caution, voluntarily, and in circumstances that satisfy the Judges’ Rules.” El-Rufai maintained that statements he made in the course of his television interview were “without any caution or warning, in a voluntary public discussion and without the protections afforded to suspects in custody. “A casual remark in a television programme cannot be elevated to a judicial confession,” he further argued. Besides, he queried the competence of the charge on the ground that it contained a “non-legal terminology.” He drew the attention of the court to the use of the word “cohorts” in Count-1 of the charge, saying it demonstrated “a fundamental lack of understanding of criminal pleading.” He insisted that the word is a “colloquial, non-legal term” that appeared nowhere in the Criminal Code, Penal Code, the ACJA or any statute in the country. “It is ambiguous, imprecise, and has no defined legal meaning,” he added. Likewise, he argued that the DSS failed to provide the “essential ingredients of the offence of interception under the Nigerian Communications Act 2003.” It was his position that for the security agency to properly charge him for the offence of interception of the NSA’s calls, it must disclose the communication that was intercepted as well as the equipment that was used. Consequently, he prayed the court to strike out the charge for failing to dosclose any offence known to the law and for equally failing to establish a prima face case to warrant his prosecution. Aside from applying to be discharged from the case, El-Rufai asked for a N2 billion cost to be awarded against the DSS “for the abuse and misuse of the court process, and the egregious, reckless, and unconstitutional misuse of the criminal justice system to harass, embarrass, and publicly victimise the defendant/applicant.” The motion was brought pursuant to Section 6(6) (A) and 36(12) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended; Section 221 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA) 2015, as well as Order 48 Rule 1 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019. El-Rufai, who was governor between 2015 and 2023 and also Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) under former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration, is billed to appear before trial Justice Joyce Abdulmalik to enter his plea to the charge against him. The DSS had in the charge that was endorsed by a team of five prosecutors from the Department of State Services (DSS) led by M. E. Ernest, alleged that El-Rufai committed the crime with some people who are currently on the run. It alleged the defendant admitted on February 13 when he appeared as a guest on Arise TV Station’s Prime Time Programme in Abuja, that he aligned with others and unlawfully intercepted the phone communications of the NSA, thereby committing an offence contrary to and punishable under section 12(1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) (Amendment) Act, 2024. It alleged that the defendant had in the course of the television interview, stated that he knew and related to a certain individual who had unlawfully intercepted the NSA’s telephone communications without reporting the person to the relevant security agencies. By failing to report the crime, El-Rufai was said to have committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 27 (b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition , Prevention, etc) Amendment, Act, 2024. The agency equally alleged that the defendant, while acting in cahoots with others that are still at large, used technical equipment that compromised public safety, national security and instilled reasonable apprehension of insecurity among Nigerians, following the unlawful interception of the NSA’s calls. He was accused of committing an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 131 (2) Nigerian Communications Act 2003. It will be recalled that El-Rufai, in his reaction to what he described as an attempt by operatives of the DSS to “abduct” him at Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja on February 12, 2026, upon returning from Cairo, insisted that the security agency was being instigated by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), which he said had received a directive from the NSA, Ribadu, to detain him. He claimed the information got to him through someone who listened in on the NSA’s telephone conversations. The former governor—who was initially detained by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which is also investigating money laundering allegations against him—was subsequently transferred to the custody of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC). The ICPC said it was equally probing him for corruption.