By Charles Chijioke
The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday heard fresh proceedings in the case against former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, over allegations linked to access to a telephone conversation involving National Security Adviser Nuhu Ribadu.
During the hearing, prosecutors presented and played a video recording of El-Rufai’s February 13, 2026 interview on Arise Television, where he claimed that information about an alleged directive for his arrest came from a tapped phone conversation.
In the interview, El-Rufai had stated: “Someone tapped his phone. The government listens to our calls all the time without a court order. Someone tapped his phone and told us that he gave the order.”
Human rights activist and lawyer Deji Adeyanju appeared in court as the second witness for the Department of State Services (DSS) after being subpoenaed.
Adeyanju told the court that reports had circulated on February 12 suggesting El-Rufai could be arrested or invited by security agencies.
He said he publicly urged the former governor to honour any invitation from authorities, insisting at the time that the matter did not appear politically motivated.
According to his testimony, he was also invited to appear on Arise Television on February 13, the same day El-Rufai granted the interview that later became central to the prosecution’s case.
After the court admitted the video recording into evidence, Adeyanju confirmed it accurately reflected El-Rufai’s interview. Prosecutors also tendered a flash drive containing Adeyanju’s own interview with Arise Television anchor Charles Aniagolu, alongside a certificate of compliance.
The documents were admitted as Exhibits H and H1.
In the interview shown in court, Adeyanju argued that if the government truly intended to arrest El-Rufai, security operatives could have detained him upon arrival at the airport.
The activist further testified that he later received an invitation from the DSS, honoured it, and made a statement confirming that El-Rufai had publicly spoken about listening to the NSA’s alleged phone conversation.
During cross-examination by El-Rufai’s lawyer, Paul Erokoro (SAN), Adeyanju was asked whether he actually heard the former governor admit to personally tapping a phone line. He replied that El-Rufai had said: “we listened to their calls.”
Erokoro also questioned whether hearing a conversation played on a phone’s speaker could amount to phone tapping. Adeyanju responded that if he had merely heard a conversation played openly on speaker mode, he would have stated so truthfully.
The defence further asked whether he would be surprised if the NSA was unable to identify the device allegedly used to intercept the conversation. Adeyanju said he had no opinion on the issue.
He also told the court that his appearance was solely because he had been summoned and was legally required to testify.
Justice Joyce Abdulmalik subsequently adjourned the matter until June 23 for continuation of the trial.
El-Rufai was arraigned in April on a five-count amended charge relating to the alleged unauthorised interception of a telephone conversation involving Ribadu. He pleaded not guilty to all charges and was granted N100 million bail in May.
The case is being closely watched because its outcome could shape future debates on privacy rights, surveillance practices, electronic communications monitoring and the legal limits of intelligence gathering in Nigeria.
If convicted, the former governor could face significant legal consequences, while an acquittal may raise questions about the strength of the prosecution’s evidence and interpretation of electronic interception laws.
Source: thecable.ng
