Reported by: Ijeoma G | Edited by: Gabriel Osa
A charge sheet purportedly filed before the Federal High Court of Nigeria, Abuja Judicial Division, shows that former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, has been accused of unlawful interception of the phone communications of Nigeria’s National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, in alleged violations of the Cybercrimes Act and the Nigerian Communications Act.
The document, dated February 16, 2026, lists the Federal Republic of Nigeria as complainant and Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, aged 65, as defendant. It outlines three counts said to stem from statements allegedly made during an appearance on Arise TV’s Prime Time programme in Abuja on February 13, 2026.
According to Count One, the defendant allegedly admitted during the televised interview that he and his associates unlawfully intercepted the phone communications of the National Security Adviser. The charge states that the alleged act constitutes an offence punishable under Section 12(1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024.
Count Two further alleges that El-Rufai stated during the same interview that he knew and could relate with certain individuals who carried out the unlawful interception of the National Security Adviser’s communications but failed to report them to relevant security agencies. This count cites Section 27(b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024, as the applicable statutory provision.
Count Three alleges that the defendant, alongside others said to be at large, used technical equipment or systems in Abuja in 2026 in a manner that compromised public safety and national security by unlawfully intercepting the communications of the National Security Adviser. This count references Section 131(2) of the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003, as the basis for prosecution.
The charge sheet indicates that counsel to the prosecution includes multiple legal practitioners listed under the Department of State Services, with an address provided at No. 1 Maitama Avenue, Aso Drive, Abuja. The document bears an official court stamp marked “Federal High Court – Official,” though independent judicial confirmation of the filing and assignment of a charge number was not immediately available at the time of this report.
Neither the Federal High Court nor the Department of State Services has publicly issued a formal statement confirming the commencement of proceedings. Similarly, there has been no official response from El-Rufai or his legal representatives regarding the authenticity of the charge sheet or the substance of the allegations contained therein.
Under Nigerian law, unlawful interception of electronic communications is treated as a serious offence, particularly when it involves public officials or matters relating to national security. The Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act provides criminal penalties for unauthorised access, interception, or tampering with electronic communications, while the Nigerian Communications Act criminalises interference with telecommunications infrastructure and services.
Legal analysts note that if formally filed and sustained, such charges would represent a significant escalation in tensions surrounding public commentary and national security disclosures. However, until the court formally assigns and lists the matter for arraignment, questions may persist regarding procedural status.
The reference in the document to alleged admissions during a televised interview places potential evidentiary weight on broadcast content. In criminal proceedings, such statements, if verified, could be subject to evidentiary scrutiny, including authentication of recordings and contextual interpretation.
The broader political implications could be substantial, given El-Rufai’s prominence in Nigeria’s political landscape and his prior tenure as governor of Kaduna State from 2015 to 2023. Any prosecution involving allegations tied to national security communications would likely attract heightened public and institutional attention.
As of press time, there was no confirmation of an arraignment date, bail proceedings, or formal service of court processes on the defendant. Legal observers indicate that further clarity is expected once the Federal High Court officially lists the matter on its cause list and relevant agencies issue formal statements.
The situation remains developing, pending authoritative confirmation from judicial and security institutions regarding the authenticity, filing status, and progression of the alleged charges.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments