The Department of State Services (DSS) on Thursday, April 23, 2026, arraigned former Governor of Kaduna State, Mallam Nasir El-Rufai before a Federal High Court in Abuja on an amended five-count charge bordering on unlawful interception of telephone communications belonging to the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu.
The charges which were amended from an initial three-count filing, accused El-Rufai of violating key provisions of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024, and the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003.
Court documents indicated that during a live appearance on Arise Television programme on February 13, 2026, El-Rufai admitted that he got access to Ribadu’s phone conversations through an associate.
The court document alleged that El-Rufai during the Television interview, claimed knowledge of individuals who carried out the interception, but failed to report them to relevant security agencies.
According to the charge sheet, count one states that El-Rufai admitted during the interview that he unlawfully intercepted the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, an act punishable under Section 12(1) of the Cybercrimes Act.
Another count accused El-Rufai of failing to report the individuals involved, thereby contravened Section 27(b) of the same law.
The prosecution also alleged the use of technical equipment by El-Rufai in a manner that compromised national security.
The case stemmed from the interview El-Rufai featured in Arise Television during which he allegedly said that surveillance capabilities were not exclusive to the government.
El-Rufai’s arraignment which was earlier scheduled for late February, was postponed following his inability to appear in court, as the DSS said his detention by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) over allegations of misappropriation during his tenure as governor of Kaduna State.
The development comes amid series of legal battles for the El-Rufai, who is a known critic of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) administration.
Legal analysts describe the case as a significant test of Nigeria’s cybercrime laws and the boundaries of free speech against national security imperatives.
