The Department of State Services (DSS) has formally arraigned former Nasir El-Rufai before the Federal High Court in Abuja on a five-count amended charge bordering on alleged breaches of national security.
El-Rufai appeared before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik and pleaded not guilty to all charges read against him.
At the start of proceedings, prosecution counsel, Oluwole Aladedoye, SAN, informed the court that the matter had been scheduled for the defendant to take his plea. He further disclosed that a fresh amended charge, filed on April 13, 2026, had replaced an earlier three-count charge.
The prosecution requested that the earlier charge be struck out, a move that was not opposed by defence counsel, Oluwole Iyamu, SAN. The court subsequently granted the request.
Following the defendant’s plea, the prosecution applied for three consecutive hearing dates to commence trial. However, the defence objected, arguing that such an arrangement could hinder adequate preparation.
Iyamu explained that his client remains in the custody of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), which could make access within a compressed trial schedule difficult. He added that proceeding in that manner might not serve the defence’s best interest.
The defence also drew the court’s attention to an existing bail application filed on February 17, 2026. Initially, a further affidavit supporting the application was missing from the court’s file, prompting the judge to stand down the matter. Upon resumption, the document was located, and proceedings continued, with the DSS indicating that it did not oppose the bail request.
Attention then shifted to a fresh application by the prosecution seeking to protect the identities of two key witnesses expected to testify in the case. The DSS requested that the witnesses’ names be withheld from public records and that pseudonyms be used during the trial, citing concerns that their families could be exposed to potential harm from individuals sympathetic to the defendant.
The defence strongly opposed the request, arguing that it infringes on the constitutional right of the accused to know his accusers. In its response, supported by a written address and further affidavit, the defence maintained that there was no credible evidence suggesting El-Rufai posed any threat or had a following capable of endangering witnesses.
Counsel further warned that granting such anonymity could prejudice the defendant and undermine the fairness of the trial. He emphasised that El-Rufai’s long record in public service should not be used to justify assumptions of risk without concrete proof.
In addition, the defence applied for an order compelling the prosecution to provide all relevant proof of evidence to enable proper preparation for trial. This request was opposed by the prosecution, which argued through a counter-affidavit that the materials being sought were outside the scope of its filed processes.
The defence also informed the court of a separate application seeking to quash the charges entirely.
With multiple applications and objections now before the court, the case is expected to proceed with further legal arguments on both procedural and substantive issues.
