A Kaduna State High Court has denied bail to former governor of the state, Nasir El-Rufai, in an ongoing trial over alleged financial misconduct.
Delivering a ruling on Tuesday, Justice Darius Khobo held that it was in the interest of justice for the defendant to remain in custody to ensure his availability for trial.
El-Rufai was arraigned by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission on a nine-count charge bordering on the alleged conferment of benefits under false pretences and dishonest disposal of loan funds.
He pleaded not guilty to all charges.
According to the court, the bail application was supported by a 24-paragraph affidavit, in which the former governor argued that the offences were non-capital.
He also cited his status as a former governor, his strong community ties, and his voluntary return to Nigeria from Egypt.
El-Rufai further claimed that he had underlying health conditions requiring specialist care.
The anti-corruption agency opposed the bail request, filing a counter-affidavit.
The ICPC argued that the offences were “economically sabotaging” and raised concerns about possible interference with witnesses and ongoing investigations.
It also described the defendant as a “flight risk with the means to evade trial due to his high standing in society.” The commission added that no medical evidence was provided to support claims of ill health.
In his ruling, Justice Khobo said the bail application relied heavily on El-Rufai’s status, describing it as “a double-edged sword.”
He noted that concerns raised by the ICPC about interference with investigations were significant.
According to the certified true copy (CTC) of the ruling delivered on April 21, obtained by The Cable, the judge held that the prosecution made “weighty depositions” justifying the refusal of bail, adding that the defence failed to counter them with further evidence.
The judge said, “It is, however, noteworthy here that in spite of these weighty depositions in the Prosecution/Respondent’s counter affidavit, which sought to controvert the depositions in the Applicant’s supporting affidavit, the Applicant never deemed it fit to file a further and better affidavit to further controvert the said weighty depositions in the Prosecution/Respondent’s counter affidavit.
“In the instant case, therefore, failure to file a further affidavit by the applicant to further controvert the above-outlined weighty depositions in the Respondent’s counter affidavit leaves the said weighty depositions in the counter affidavit unchallenged and deemed to be admitted as being correct, and I so hold.
“The law is trite: if in an application for bail pending trial there is good reason to believe or strongly suspect that the accused will jump bail, thereby making himself unavailable to stand his trial, and/or will interfere with the witnesses, thereby constituting an obstacle in the way of justice, the Court will be acting within its undoubted discretion to refuse bail.
“In the instant application, the applicant alluded to facts that he has health conditions requiring specialist monitoring, but the applicant did not attach any medical evidence to substantiate his claim of ill-health.
“The law is settled that where an application for bail seeks to lay claim to ill-health, credible evidence in that branch of medicine ought to be made available before the court by the Applicant.
“Accordingly, the Defendant/Applicant’s application for bail pending trial fails and is hereby REFUSED.
“The Defendant/Applicant shall remain in the custody of the Respondent (ICPC) pending the commencement of the trial.
“The Respondent/Prosecution is hereby ordered to ensure the trial of the Defendant commences expeditiously and shall be given an accelerated hearing by this Court on a day-to-day basis where practicable.”
Afterwards, the prosecutor and el-Rufai’s counsel agreed that the trial should commence the first week of June.
The case was then adjourned to June 1, 2, 3, and 4, 2026.
