A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Monday granted bail to former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, in the sum of N100 million over allegations bordering on unlawful interception of telephone conversations linked to the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu.
The ruling was delivered by Justice Joyce Abdulmalik following arguments presented by counsel to the defendant and the prosecution team representing the Department of State Services (DSS).
El-Rufai is currently facing a five-count charge filed by the DSS, which accuses him of illegally intercepting and monitoring communications associated with the telephone line of the National Security Adviser.
The charges, which have generated widespread public and political attention, form part of what security authorities described as an investigation into activities considered capable of threatening national security and violating existing telecommunications and intelligence laws.
In her ruling, Justice Abdulmalik held that the former governor should be released on bail pending the determination of the case, but attached stringent conditions to ensure his availability throughout the trial.
According to the court, El-Rufai must provide one surety in like sum of N100 million.
The judge further directed that the surety must be a resident of either Maitama or Asokoro districts of Abuja, two high-profile residential areas within the Federal Capital Territory.
Justice Abdulmalik also ordered that the surety must deposit the original Certificate of Occupancy of a landed property with the court registry as part of the bail requirements.
The court explained that the conditions were intended to guarantee the integrity of the judicial process and ensure compliance with all court directives during the proceedings.
Legal representatives of the former governor had earlier urged the court to grant bail on liberal terms, arguing that El-Rufai was a prominent public figure with a verifiable address and no record of jumping bail.
The defence team also maintained that the charges against him were bailable offences and insisted that the former governor was prepared to stand trial and clear his name.
Counsel for the DSS, however, reportedly opposed unconditional bail, citing the sensitive nature of the allegations and the national security implications surrounding the matter.
The prosecution argued that the allegations involved unlawful surveillance and interception of communications linked to a high-ranking national security official, making the case one of significant public interest.
Despite the prosecution’s objections, the court ruled that bail remained a constitutional right and that there was insufficient evidence before it to deny the defendant temporary freedom pending trial.
El-Rufai, who served as governor of Kaduna State for eight years, arrived at the court amid tight security and heavy media presence.
Supporters and political associates of the former governor were also seen within the court premises, closely monitoring proceedings as the hearing unfolded.
The case has continued to attract national attention due to the personalities involved and the seriousness of the allegations.
Political observers say the development could further deepen debates around national security, surveillance powers and political accountability in Nigeria.
The DSS alleges that the former governor was involved in activities related to the interception of confidential communications connected to the office of the National Security Adviser, an accusation that has sparked intense legal and political discussions across the country.
However, El-Rufai has denied wrongdoing and is expected to contest the allegations during trial.
The court subsequently adjourned proceedings to a later date for the commencement of full hearing on the substantive matter.
Legal analysts believe the case may test the boundaries between state security interests, privacy laws and the constitutional rights of public officials and citizens.
As proceedings continue, many Nigerians are expected to follow the trial closely because of its potential political and legal implications ahead of the country’s evolving political landscape.
