By Eric Elezuo

For 150 days and counting, a former Governor of Kaduna State, and one time Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, has remained in the custody of various security agencies including the Department of State Services (DSS), the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) for alleged offences ranging from fund misappropriation, wiretapping and eavesdropping on security information among others. El-Rufai has not been found of any offence though he has spent over 150 days in custody.

The former governor’s plight was brought back to the fore weekend, when his wife, Asia Ahmad El-Rufai, made a passionate appeal to the international community to intervene over what she described as her husband’s prolonged detention and alleged denial of due process.

Mrs El-Rufai argued that the former governor’s continued incarceration amounted to “punishment before trial” and posed a threat to Nigeria’s democratic institutions. She noted that her husband has not been fairly treated even as she alleged that the former Director-General of the Bureau of Public Enterprise (BPE) may have taken ill in custody, bleeding from both nose and mouth. She wondered how someone, could made to undergo such severe punishment even when he is not undergone any trial, let alone being found guilty.

In a statement she signed herself, released his social media handles to mark what she described as the 150th day of El-Rufai’s detention, El-Rufai’s wife called on foreign governments, multilateral and multinational organisations and international human rights groups to closely monitor the legal proceedings involving her husband.

She acknowledged not speaking as a political actor but as a wife and mother seeking fairness for a member of her family.

The woman was of the opinion that the period of her husband’s incarceration without trial, has taken a significant emotional and physical toll on the former governor, members of his family and close associates.

“On the 150th day of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai’s detention, I ask readers outside Nigeria to pause over what that number means. One hundred and fifty days is not a legal phrase.

Acknowledging that her husband had been a controversial figure during his more than two decades in public service, as well as how rule of law and democracy should play out, she observed that “My husband is no stranger to controversy or public scrutiny. He has been praised, criticised, loved and opposed. That is democracy.

“But what is happening to him today is not democracy, and it is not accountability. It is punishment before trial,” she said.

Continuing and reflecting on the origin of the travails of her husband, Mrs El-Rufai traced his confrontation with the law to when am attempt was first made to arrest him at the airport on his way back from Egypt. The embarrassing situation at the airport culminated in his appearance for questioning, and ever since he has been allowed except when he was momentarily permitted to go and bury his dead mother.

She said, “There was the sudden invitation, his voluntary appearance before the authorities, and the promise of bail that existed on paper but not in freedom.

“There was the night he was moved between locations without warning and without the dignity of allowing his family to know where he was being taken,” she stated.

Asia also alleged that the former governor became seriously ill while in custody and experienced bleeding from his nose and mouth.

She claimed that officials were reluctant to provide him with adequate medical attention or allow his family to deliver his prescribed medication.

“I still remember the helplessness of hearing that he had fallen gravely ill in custody, bleeding from his nose and mouth, while those responsible for his welfare were reluctant to provide the care any person deserves.

“I remember the anxiety of trying to get his medication to him and wondering whether officials would accept it,” she said.

According to her, the detention had inflicted emotional distress on the family, which continued to wait for the legal process to take its course.

“These are not abstract violations. They are the moments that chip away at a family’s resolve and hope,” she added.

While not requesting that her husband be placed above the law, or escape investigation as a public officer, she insisted that such investigations must be conducted transparently, and in accordance with constitutional safeguards.

“If the state believes it has evidence, let it be presented before an impartial court, openly and fairly.

“But justice cannot be selective. It cannot be pursued through overlapping charges, repeated detention, impossible bail conditions and public humiliation designed to persuade the nation of guilt before a judge has heard the case,” she said.

She accused the government of the day of orchestrating the gory details of the situation, including stringent bail conditions to deprive her husband of freedom, even as the election approaches, stressing that Nigeria was drifting from legitimate accountability towards “lawfare,” which she described as the deployment of legal institutions and judicial procedures as political weapons. She believes that El-Rufai’s problems are the consequence of his disagreement with President Bola Tinubu, and his eventual decanting from the All Progressives Congress (APC).

“The concern is not whether former officials may be investigated; they can and should be.

“The concern is whether the law is being applied neutrally or deployed against those who have fallen out of political favour,” she said.

“His political rupture with President Bola Tinubu’s ruling All Progressives Congress and his refusal to surrender his independent voice should not make him a target for indefinite punishment or detention disguised as prosecution,” she said.

“The legal architecture”, she continued, “surrounding him is bewildering even to trained observers: multiple charges in different courts, overlapping allegations, shifting statutory theories and duplicated claims arising from the same alleged events.

“If one application for bail is made and the conditions are met, another accusation can be filed the next day. If one judge must consider freedom, another process can be used to delay it,” she alleged, querying why such procedures was allowed to turn the judicial process into a form of punishment before conviction.

In March 2026, the ICPC arraigned El-Rufai, alongside one Joel Adoga, before Honourable Justice A.I. Aikawa of the Federal High Court, Kaduna Division, on a 10-count charge bordering on abuse of office, money laundering and fraud.

According to the charge sheet marked FHC/KD/73/2026, the former governor was accused of unlawfully receiving multiple sums of money in naira and foreign currencies while serving as a public officer.

Specifically, the Commission alleged that El-Rufai, in September 2020 and January 2023, received the sum of N289,826,998.12 on each occasion as severance allowance, far exceeding the legally entitled sum of N20,013,245.00, being 300 percent of his annual basic salary.

The ICPC charge further revealed that between 2016 and 2023, the former governor allegedly took control of various sums in United States Dollars through his domiciliary account with Guaranty Trust Bank. These include $320,800 allegedly paid in tranches by Joel Adoga, as well as other deposits amounting to $155,800, $305,300, and several smaller sums from different individuals, all reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

Joel Adoga was also accused of conspiring with the former governor in July 2019 to disguise the origin of $10,000 deposited into the said account.

One of the counts reads that both defendants, in July 2019 at Wuse, Abuja, allegedly conspired to disguise the origin of $10,000 paid into the former governor’s domiciliary account, knowing or reasonably ought to have known that the funds formed part of the proceeds of unlawful activity, contrary to and punishable under relevant provisions of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

When the charges were read, both defendants pleaded not guilty to all counts, but they were ordered to be remanded in ICPC custody.

The ICPC further violated the court-ordered access to the former governor, saying that the order did not override the agency’s internal security rules.

In May 2026, the Federal High Court sitting in Abuja granted El-Rufai N100 million bail in the trial over the alleged unlawful interception of the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu. However, he was re-arrested right at the court premises by the DSS, prompting the family to raise alarm.

EL-RUFAI’S STRINGENT BAIL CONDITIONS

Much as the embattled former Kaduna governor was granted bail, the conditions have appeared too stringent and tough to meet, the situation that prompted the African Democratic Congress (ADC) among many other concerned Nigerians to react.

In its immediate reaction, the ADC accused the Federal Government of turning El-Rufai into a political prisoner, describing his ordeal as “political persecution dressed up as prosecution.”

El-Rufai’s family also condemned the re-arrest.

El-Rufai’s second wife, Hasiat, who addressed journalists outside the DSS facility, said the family was traumatised by the development and lived daily under the shadow of threats and surveillance.

“We now live in constant fear. Every day we get a threat — DSS is coming to raid your house, ICPC is coming to raid your house, police are coming to raid your house. You are being followed. Our phones are tapped,” she said.

As part of the bail conditions, the trial judge, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik ordered the defendant to produce a surety who must be a federal civil servant not below Grade Level 17.

According to the court, the surety must not only be resident in either Maitama or Asokoro highbrow districts of Abuja, but must also deposit the original Certificate of Occupancy of a landed property not valued below the bail sum.

It held that the surety must also provide evidence of receipt of salary for at least three months, with an authenticated letter from the manager of a bank within the jurisdiction of the court.

By Eric Elezuo

A former Vice President, and Presidential Candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has lashed out at the administration of President Bola Tinubu over its prolonged silence on the death of a medical practitioner, Mary Habila, who died at the residence of the Minister of Works, Dave Umahi.

Atiku condemned the inability of the  Tinubu-led government from making any pronouncements or instituting any form of probe to unravel the cause of death since the sad incident occurred on June 27, 2026, saying the administration has failed comprehensively and disgracefully.

Atiku’s remarks are contained in a statement he released on his social platforms endorsed with his regular AA.

While not casting any blame on any particular person or entity, Atiku maintained that condolences are not enough,but must be accompanied by thorough investigation into the circumstances that led to the death of the 26 years old medical practitioner in her prime.

The former Vice President therefore called for a “credible, independent, and transparent investigation” to establish the truth, noting that “it is the refusal of the Federal Government to guarantee such an investigation that constitutes the scandal before us”.

The statement in full:

I have followed with deep sorrow and mounting concern the reports surrounding the death of Miss Mary Habila, a 26-year-old Nigerian from Nok, Southern Kaduna, who died on June 27, 2026, within the private residence of the Honourable Minister of Works, Senator David Umahi, in Uburu, Ebonyi State.

First, I extend my heartfelt condolences to the Habila family. No family should have to mourn a daughter taken in the prime of her life while also fighting simply to learn the truth of how she died.

But condolences are not enough. Nigerians deserve answers, and it is on this score that the Tinubu administration has failed, comprehensively and disgracefully.

Consider the facts that are not in dispute. A young woman died in the residence of a serving Federal Minister. For nearly two weeks, neither the Minister, nor the police, nor any arm of government said a word to the Nigerian people. It took the courage of Sahara Reporters to bring this death into public view. Three weeks after her death, no autopsy has been performed. No cause of death has been established. The investigation remains domiciled in the very state where the Minister served two terms as Governor and where his influence is beyond question.

And through all of this, silence from the Presidency. Silence from the Federal Executive Council. Silence from the Inspector-General of Police. Silence from the National Assembly. Not one word. Not one directive. Not one gesture to assure Nigerians that the life of Mary Habila matters to this government.

Instead, the Minister has been permitted to manage the narrative of a death that occurred under his own roof: issuing statements through his personal aides, deploying his private lawyers to correspond with the police, and continuing his official duties as though nothing has happened, while civil society groups, youth organisations, and the family’s own community cry out for an independent inquiry.

Let me be clear: I make no pronouncement on anyone’s guilt or innocence. That is precisely the point. Only a credible, independent, and transparent investigation can establish the truth, and it is the refusal of the Federal Government to guarantee such an investigation that constitutes the scandal before us.

A government’s first duty is the protection of life. Where a life is lost in circumstances touching a high official of state, the burden on government to act transparently is at its heaviest.

President Tinubu’s administration has instead treated this tragedy as an inconvenience to be waited out. If the death of a young Nigerian woman in a Minister’s residence cannot stir this government to act, then Nigerians must ask: whose life, exactly, does this government value?

I therefore demand the following: One, President Bola Tinubu must direct the Honourable Minister of Works to step aside immediately, pending the conclusion of investigations. This is not a punishment; it is the minimum standard of public accountability in any serious democracy. No official under this cloud should preside over a federal ministry as though it were business as usual.

Two, the Inspector-General of Police must immediately transfer the investigation from the Ebonyi State Command to Force Headquarters, with the involvement of independent forensic experts. No investigation conducted in the shadow of the Minister’s home-state influence can command public confidence.

Three, a full, independent, and internationally credible autopsy must be conducted without further delay, with the findings made public. The stalemate over the post-mortem, three weeks after this young woman’s death is an indictment of every institution involved.

Four, the family of Mary Habila must be protected from any pressure, inducement, or intimidation, and must be guaranteed unfettered access to the facts of their daughter’s death.

The measure of a nation is how it responds when the powerful are touched by tragedy and the powerless demand truth. Mary Habila was somebody’s daughter, somebody’s sister, a young professional with her life ahead of her. She was a Nigerian. Her death must not be reduced to a footnote of political convenience.

Nigeria will work again, but only when the life of every Nigerian counts, and when no one, however highly placed, stands beyond the reach of accountability.

May the soul of Mary Habila rest in peace. May her family find justice. -AA

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has accused the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of aiding President Bola Tinubu’s agenda to weaken opposition parties ahead of the 2027 polls by granting access to a factional leader of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

In a statement issued Monday by the Atiku Media Office, Atiku alleged that INEC’s actions amounted to partisanship and a violation of the Constitution and the Electoral Act.

The statement referenced a July 11, 2026 claim by Nafiu Bala Gombe, who “parades himself as National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC)”, that he had succeeded in uploading the names of his candidates on INEC’s portal.

According to Atiku’s office, uploading candidates is part of the process for the 2027 General Elections, made possible by access codes granted to political parties in line with INEC guidelines.

“Meanwhile, INEC has been mum, and has not denied or confirmed this obvious contradiction to the law and its own guidelines,” the statement said.

Atiku’s team argued that by granting an access code to Bala Gombe, INEC was recognizing a “pretender” despite having “since validated the chairmanship of the Sen. David Mark-led exco.”

“By granting access code to Bala Gombe, a pretender, laying claims to the chairmanship of the ADC, though the law is not on his side and INEC has since validated the chairmanship of the Sen. David Mark-led exco, the electoral umpire is once again manifesting its partisanship,” the statement noted.

It drew parallels with a past incident under Prof. Joash Amupitan-led INEC, alleging the commission “illegally removed the names of the duly recognised ADC exco following the judicial rascality of Justice Lifu in ignoring a superior ruling of an appellate court.”

The statement described the “so-called ‘successful’ uploading of ‘candidates’ by Nafiu Bala Gombe” as lacking legal basis.

“Nafiu Bala Gombe is not recognised as ADC Chairman. Mark is duly recognised. Can there be two recognised Chairmen of a political party? Possibly only in an INEC led by Amupitan. Can INEC grant two access codes to a political party? Certainly not,” it added.

Atiku’s office warned that the development “is a recipe for crisis and confirms that Prof Joash Amupitan was appointed to enable the weakening of the opposition parties by creating crisis even where none exists.”

Citing the law, the statement noted that Section 222 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides that candidates must emerge through recognized party primaries supervised by INEC, while Section 84 of the Electoral Act 2022 requires parties to submit only one validly nominated candidate per elective office.

“Nafiu Bala Gombe and his criminal gang did not conduct any primaries. The INEC granting of access code to Nafiu Bala Gombe is unconstitutional and unlawful. The only submitted candidates known to the law are those of David Mark. Any parallel submission such as Nafiu Bala Gombe’s is null and void,” it said.

The statement called on the INEC Chairman to stop “fomenting crisis in the ADC and the other opposition parties and by so doing helping President Bola Tinubu’s agenda of total State capture.”