The Court of Appeal in Kaduna has upheld the refusal of bail to former Governor Nasir El-Rufai of Kaduna State.
This was as the court ruled that the former governor failed to present fresh and compelling evidence to justify his release from detention pending the determination of his criminal trial.
A three-member panel of the appellate court unanimously dismissed El-Rufai’s appeal in a judgment delivered on Thursday, affirming the decision of the Kaduna State High Court, which rejected his second bail application on June 10, 2026.
According to the Certified True Copy of the judgment obtained on Friday, Justice Onyekachi Aja Otisi, who delivered the lead judgment, held that the former governor had not established any special circumstances warranting the appellate court’s intervention.
“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 ruled.
El-Rufai, who governed Kaduna State from 2015 to 2023, is being prosecuted by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) over alleged financial offences linked to his administration.
The former governor has denied wrongdoing and challenged the circumstances surrounding his continued detention.
Following the rejection of his second bail application by the state high court, El-Rufai approached the appellate court, arguing that the circumstances of his case justified his release.
However, the Court of Appeal held that the lower court acted within its discretionary powers, noting that its decision was based on affidavit evidence presented by both the defence and the prosecution.
A key issue considered by the appellate panel was the prosecution’s claim that some of El-Rufai’s public statements raised concerns about possible interference with the administration of justice.
The prosecution had cited remarks attributed to the former governor about protecting his political legacy against those allegedly seeking to criminalise him.
It also referred to an interview El-Rufai granted Arise Television on April 26, 2026, during which it alleged that he admitted to wiretapping the telephone line of the National Security Adviser.
According to the judgment, El-Rufai acknowledged participating in the interview and confirmed that he was being tried in a separate case relating to the subject matter.
The appellate court, however, emphasised that the consideration of these issues in determining bail did not amount to a declaration of guilt.
Otisi stressed that the former governor retained his constitutional right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
“Now, without doubt, by unequivocal constitutional provisions, the Appellant is presumed innocent until proven guilty,” he said.
The court explained that the trial court’s assessment of the prosecution’s concerns about possible interference with justice was not a determination of the allegations against El-Rufai.
Another argument advanced by the former governor concerned his return to custody after attending the burial of his late mother. He maintained that his release to attend the funeral and subsequent return demonstrated that he was not a flight risk and should have been granted bail.
The prosecution, however, argued that security operatives accompanied and closely monitored him throughout the burial arrangements.
The appellate court also faulted the defence’s reliance on photographs allegedly showing El-Rufai attending funeral prayers at the National Mosque in Abuja.
Otisi noted that although the photographs were referenced in the former governor’s affidavit, they were not attached to the bail application presented before the trial court.
He maintained that the trial judge could not be expected to draw conclusions from evidence that had not been properly presented.
“Courts are not allowed to act on speculations or conjecture to reach its decision, more so in our criminal jurisprudence,” the judge stated.
Consequently, the appellate court upheld the lower court’s conclusion that El-Rufai had not sufficiently demonstrated that his return to custody was entirely voluntary or that the circumstances surrounding the burial justified a different bail decision.
The panel also affirmed the order directing an accelerated hearing of the criminal proceedings, with the trial to continue on a day-to-day basis as far as practicable while the former governor remains in ICPC custody.
The court noted that the defence had not established that the prosecution was failing to pursue the case diligently.
Otisi, however, indicated that El-Rufai could return to the trial court to seek a fresh consideration of his bail application if the prosecution failed to diligently prosecute the case.
In a concurring judgment, Justice Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo agreed that the former governor had not presented new and compelling facts to warrant a reversal of the earlier decision.
“Nothing had changed; therefore, I am unable to agree that a miscarriage of justice had occurred,” she said.
Justice Lateef Ganiyu, the third member of the panel, also concurred with the lead judgment, agreeing that the failure to attach documents relied upon by the defence weakened its case.
The ruling leaves the earlier refusal of bail in place, while the criminal trial is expected to proceed under the accelerated-hearing arrangement ordered by the lower court.
