Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
Abuja, Nigeria — Tensions within Nigeria’s political and security establishment have escalated sharply after former Kaduna State governor Nasir El‑Rufai disclosed that he and his associates accessed an intercepted phone conversation involving Nuhu Ribadu, the nation’s sitting National Security Adviser (NSA), in which Ribadu allegedly ordered El‑Rufai’s arrest. Speaking on the widely‑viewed Prime Time programme on Arise Television, El‑Rufai said the call was “tapped” by an unnamed third party and that the intercepted directive prompted what he described as an attempted detention by security operatives.
El‑Rufai’s remarks have reverberated across Nigeria’s political landscape, triggering a firestorm of reactions from the presidency, legal commentators, civil society figures and political opponents. The former governor’s admission of accessing an intercepted call involving the NSA — a senior national security official — has raised legal and constitutional questions, while putting the spotlight on deep divisions between Nigeria’s political elite and its security apparatus.
In the televised interview, El‑Rufai painted a detailed account of his return to Nigeria from abroad, describing how operatives of the Department of State Services (DSS) allegedly sought to detain him at Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja. He accused the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) of procuring the DSS operatives to “abduct” him, and suggested that the directive emanated directly from Ribadu.
El‑Rufai said the intercepted conversation revealed Ribadu had given the order to take him into custody. “He made the call because we listened to their calls. The government thinks they are the only ones that listen to calls, but we also have our ways,” he told the programme’s anchor. When challenged about the legality of such phone interceptions — which he acknowledged would fall outside legal authorisation — El‑Rufai asserted that government agencies routinely monitor communications without court orders.
El‑Rufai’s comments extended beyond the immediate security incident at the airport. He reiterated long‑standing criticisms of the use of security agencies in what he described as politically motivated actions against opposition figures. He stated that, while he planned to honour a formal invitation from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for questioning on unspecified allegations, the manner of the alleged detention attempt by the DSS was unacceptable and politically loaded.
The presidency responded swiftly, with the Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, describing El‑Rufai’s admission of accessing a tapped call involving the NSA as deeply concerning for national security. Onanuga said the matter “should not be ignored” and called for a full investigation, warning that El‑Rufai “is not too big to face the wrath of the law.” The presidency’s reaction has underscored the seriousness with which the government views the implications of a senior political figure openly referencing intercepted communications with a top security official.
Senior presidential aides also reiterated that intercepting communications of the NSA is illegal and cannot be condoned. They highlighted that El‑Rufai’s acknowledgment of such activity on national television raises significant legal and ethical questions. Critics within the government have framed the incident as not just political posturing, but a possible admission of participating in unlawful surveillance activities, potentially exposing sensitive national security information.
The controversy has inflamed debates within civil society and among legal commentators about the rule of law, executive power, and the proper role of Nigeria’s security agencies. Former presidential aide and public commentator Reno Omokri condemned El‑Rufai’s remarks as “callous,” arguing that openly admitting to unlawful interception of communications — particularly involving a national security official — is itself a criminal matter demanding scrutiny and accountability.
Human rights advocates have echoed these concerns, stressing the need for adherence to legal frameworks governing surveillance and arrest procedures. Under Nigerian law, interception of telephone communications generally requires a court order or other lawful justification; admitting to such practices without clear legal authority has sparked calls for judicial review and legislative oversight of intelligence and security practices.
In contrast, supporters of El‑Rufai argue that his disclosure sheds light on what they view as systemic abuses by security agencies against political opponents, characterising the episode as a symptom of broader political repression. They assert that exposing such activities contributes to national discourse on transparency and accountability in governance.
The controversy also adds fuel to ongoing disputes between the former governor and current authorities. El‑Rufai, a prominent and often polarising political figure, has frequently criticised the administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and his appointees, framing some actions against him as politically motivated rather than grounded in legitimate legal process.
Legal analysts have noted that El‑Rufai’s intention to attend scheduled questioning by EFCC and ICPC suggests a dual strategy: to comply with lawful investigations while contesting what he describes as unlawful coercive tactics by security agents. They caution, however, that publicly discussing intercepted communications involving an NSA could inadvertently hinder lawful investigations or expose sensitive operational information.
Beyond the legal and political ramifications, the incident underscores Nigeria’s ongoing struggle with institutional trust and the separation of powers. The interplay between intelligence operations, political rivalry and public accountability continues to raise difficult questions for a country navigating complex security challenges while attempting to fortify democratic norms.
As the situation evolves, key stakeholders — including Nigeria’s judiciary, legislative oversight bodies and independent regulatory institutions — are likely to face pressure to clarify legal boundaries governing surveillance and arrest powers. Whether El‑Rufai’s disclosure will prompt structural reforms or deepen existing political fissures remains to be seen.
The unfolding developments represent a significant moment in Nigeria’s political narrative, one that touches on national security, rule of law, and the delicate balance between state authority and individual rights in a turbulent and highly contested political environment.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments