Appeal Court Orders Fresh Trial In El-Rufai N400bn Rights Suit

Appeal Court Orders Fresh Trial In El-Rufai N400bn Rights Suit
Court cites lack of hearing notice and breach of fair hearing
Case to be retried before another Federal High Court judge

The Court of Appeal, Kaduna Division, has set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court in a fundamental human rights suit filed by former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, and ordered a fresh hearing before another judge.

In a unanimous decision delivered on March 17, a three-member panel led by Justice Onyekachi Otisi held that the earlier proceedings breached El-Rufai’s constitutional right to fair hearing.

EDITOR’S PICKS

EKO HOT BLOG reports that the appellate court nullified the entire judgment delivered on July 30, 2024, describing it as a nullity due to procedural lapses. Other members of the panel included Justices Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo and Sybil Gbagi.

The appeal, marked CA/K/240/2024, was filed against the Kaduna State House of Assembly and the state Attorney General. The dispute arose from a probe by the Assembly into financial transactions, loans and contracts under El-Rufai’s administration between May 2015 and May 2023, during which he was indicted over an alleged ₦400 billion fraud.

El-Rufai had approached the Federal High Court, arguing that he was not invited to appear before the committee despite being affected by its recommendations.

However, the trial court declined jurisdiction and transferred the matter to the Kaduna State High Court, prompting the appeal.

Justice Otisi, in the lead judgment, ruled that there was no credible evidence that the appellant was served with a hearing notice, a requirement the court described as fundamental to establishing jurisdiction.

“The lower court ought to have insisted on the production of acceptable proof of service to ascertain that the appellant was indeed served with hearing notice,” the court held.

The respondents had claimed that notice was served via a text message to El-Rufai’s counsel, but the appellate court rejected the argument, citing inconsistencies in the phone numbers provided and lack of documentary proof.

The court held that failure to properly serve hearing notice denied the appellant the opportunity to respond to critical filings.

It further faulted the trial court for proceeding to hear and determine the case on the same day, without allowing the legally required time for response.

The court ruled that such actions violated fair hearing principles and rendered the proceedings invalid.

Consequently, the appellate court ordered a fresh hearing of the case before another judge of the Federal High Court, with all parties directed to bear their respective costs.