The Court of Appeal in Kaduna has dismissed an appeal by former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, challenging the refusal of a fresh bail application by the Kaduna State High Court.
The three-member appellate panel, in a unanimous judgment delivered on Thursday, held that El-Rufai failed to establish fresh facts or special circumstances warranting interference with the lower court’s decision to deny him bail.
According to the Certified True Copy of the judgment obtained by our correspondent on Friday, the lead judgment, delivered by Justice Onyekachi Aja Otisi, affirmed the ruling of the Kaduna State High Court, which refused the former governor’s second bail application on June 10, 2026.
El-Rufai, who governed Kaduna State from 2015 to 2023, is being prosecuted by the ICPC over alleged financial offences arising from his administration.
The former governor has denied wrongdoing and challenged the circumstances surrounding his continued detention.
The Kaduna State High Court had dismissed the bail application filed by the former governor and granted accelerated hearing on the matter.
Dissatisfied, El-Rufai approached the appeal court.
The appellate court held that the lower court acted within its discretion in refusing bail, noting that the decision was based on the affidavit evidence presented by both parties.
Otisi said, “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.”
The court considered the prosecution’s argument that some of El-Rufai’s public remarks and statements during a televised interview raised concerns about possible interference with the course of justice.
The prosecution had told the court that El-Rufai made remarks about defending his political legacy against those seeking to criminalise him. It also alleged that he admitted during an Arise Television interview on April 26, 2026, to wiretapping the telephone line of the National Security Adviser.
According to the judgment, El-Rufai acknowledged participating in the interview and being tried in a separate case relating to the subject matter.
However, the appellate court stressed that its decision did not amount to a finding of guilt, noting that the former governor remained presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Otisi stated, “Now, without doubt, by unequivocal constitutional provisions, the Appellant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.”
He added that the trial court’s assessment of the affidavit evidence concerning the possibility of interference with justice did not constitute a pronouncement of guilt.
The court also considered El-Rufai’s argument that his return to custody after attending his late mother’s burial demonstrated that he was not a flight risk.
The former governor had argued that his release to attend the burial and subsequent return to custody were compelling grounds for granting bail.
However, the prosecution maintained that he had been accompanied and closely monitored by security agents during the burial.
The appellate court noted that photographs allegedly showing El-Rufai attending the funeral prayers at the National Mosque in Abuja were referred to in his affidavit but were not attached to the application before the trial court.
Otisi said the trial judge could not speculate on what the photographs would have shown.
He stated, “Courts are not allowed to act on speculations or conjecture to reach its decision, more so in our criminal jurisprudence.”
The court consequently upheld the lower court’s conclusion that El-Rufai had not established that his return to custody was entirely voluntary or that the circumstances justified a different bail decision.
It also upheld the order for an accelerated hearing of the criminal trial, with proceedings to be conducted on a day-to-day basis as far as practicable while El-Rufai remained in the custody of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission.
The appellate court noted that no evidence had been presented to show that the prosecution had failed to diligently pursue the case.
Otisi added that El-Rufai could return to the trial court to seek further consideration of his bail application if the prosecution failed to prosecute the case diligently.
In a concurring opinion, Justice Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo agreed that the former governor had not presented fresh and compelling facts to justify a different outcome.
She said, “Nothing had changed; therefore, I am unable to agree that a miscarriage of justice had occurred.”
Justice Lateef Ganiyu also concurred with the lead judgment, holding that the failure to attach documents relied upon in the bail application worked against the appellant’s case.
