Precious Nwonu, Enugu

The Court of Appeal in Kaduna has dismissed an appeal by former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai challenging the refusal of his second bail application by the state’s High Court.

The appellate court, in a unanimous judgment delivered on Thursday, held that El-Rufai failed to present fresh facts or special circumstances that would justify overturning the lower court’s decision.

The judgment, obtained by a correspondent on Friday, was delivered by a three-member panel led by Justice Onyekachi Aja Otisi, who affirmed the High Court’s June 10, 2026, ruling denying the former governor bail.

“There is no merit in this appeal; it fails and is hereby dismissed. The ruling of the lower court delivered on 10/6/2026 is hereby affirmed,” Otisi held.

El-Rufai, who governed Kaduna State from 2015 to 2023, is being prosecuted by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission over alleged financial offences linked to his administration. He has denied wrongdoing.

In reaching its decision, the appellate court considered the prosecution’s concerns that some of the former governor’s public statements could potentially interfere with the administration of justice.

The prosecution had cited an interview El-Rufai granted Arise Television on April 26, 2026, during which he allegedly admitted to wiretapping the telephone line of the National Security Adviser. It also referred to remarks attributed to him about defending his political legacy against attempts to criminalise him.

According to the judgment, El-Rufai acknowledged participating in the interview and noted that he was facing a separate case relating to the subject matter.

However, the appellate court emphasised that its consideration of the evidence presented in the bail proceedings did not amount to a determination of his guilt.

Otisi reiterated that the former governor remained presumed innocent until proven guilty, as guaranteed by the Constitution.

The panel also rejected El-Rufai’s argument that his return to custody after attending his late mother’s burial demonstrated that he was not a flight risk.

The former governor had argued that his release to attend the burial and subsequent return to custody constituted compelling grounds for bail.

The prosecution, however, maintained that security operatives accompanied and monitored him throughout the period.

The court noted that El-Rufai’s affidavit referred to photographs allegedly showing him attending funeral prayers at the National Mosque in Abuja, but the photographs were not attached to the application before the trial court.

Otisi said the trial judge could not speculate on the contents of documents that had not been presented as evidence.

“Courts are not allowed to act on speculations or conjecture to reach a decision, more so in our criminal jurisprudence,” he said.

The appellate court consequently upheld the lower court’s finding that El-Rufai had not sufficiently demonstrated that his return to custody was entirely voluntary or that the circumstances warranted a different bail decision.

It also affirmed the order directing an accelerated hearing of the criminal case, with proceedings to be conducted on a day-to-day basis as far as practicable while the former governor remained in ICPC custody.

The panel observed that there was no evidence before it showing that the prosecution had failed to pursue the case diligently. It added that El-Rufai could approach the trial court for another consideration of his bail application if the prosecution failed to prosecute the case diligently.

In a concurring judgment, Justice Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo agreed that the former governor had not presented fresh and compelling evidence to justify a different outcome.

“Nothing had changed; therefore, I am unable to agree that a miscarriage of justice had occurred,” she held.

Justice Lateef Ganiyu also concurred with the lead judgment, noting that the failure to attach documents relied upon in the bail application weakened El-Rufai’s case.

The ICPC took the former governor into custody in March 2026 following investigations into alleged financial infractions and procurement irregularities during his administration from 2015 to 2023.