The Kaduna Division of the Court of Appeal has directed the Federal High Court (FHC) to conduct a fresh hearing on former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai’s application seeking enforcement of his fundamental rights against the State House of Assembly.
The appellate court held that the July 30, 2024 judgment of the FHC in Kaduna violated El-Rufai’s right to fair hearing.
It consequently nullified the decision and instructed the Chief Judge of the FHC, Justice John Tsoho, to reassign the matter for a new hearing before a different judge.
El-Rufai had approached the FHC in Kaduna following his indictment by the House of Assembly over an alleged N400 billion fraud.
He contended that the Assembly constituted an ad-hoc committee to probe loans, contracts, financial dealings and other transactions undertaken by the Kaduna State Government between May 29, 2015 and May 29, 2023.
According to him, about 70 individuals were listed and invited during the committee’s proceedings.
However, he maintained that he was not invited at any stage before the committee concluded its assignment and issued a final report indicting him.
El-Rufai accused the Assembly and the Attorney-General of Kaduna State of violating his fundamental right to fair hearing.
He also challenged the procedure adopted by the lower court in declining to entertain his application.
Justice Coram Aikawa of the FHC had earlier declined jurisdiction over the case and transferred it to the Kaduna State High Court, citing lack of jurisdiction.
But in a lead judgment delivered on March 17, 2026 by Justice Onyekachi Aja Otisi, with Justices Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo and Sybil Nwaka Gbagi concurring, the Court of Appeal found merit in El-Rufai’s appeal.
Otisi said: “It is my considered view that what happened at the lower court on July 18, 2024 was far more than a mere refusal of an application for adjournment. This is because it resulted in a denial of the fundamental right of fair hearing of the appellant guaranteed by Section 36 (1) of the Constitution.
“The lower Court had the duty to do justice according to law and not by sentiment. The justice of the suit leading to the Appeal was for the lower court to set aside the proceedings of 18/7/2024 on the ground that the Appellant was not afforded fair hearing.
“The consequence of the denial of the right to fair hearing is that the proceedings and decision of the lower court, no matter how well conducted, amount to a nullity and is liable to be set aside.
“Therefore, having found that the proceedings of the lower court conducted on July 18, 2024 was in breach of the Appellant’s right to fair hearing, the judgment delivered thereon on July 30, 2024 was a nullity, and liable to be set aside.
“Accordingly, the said judgment delivered on 30/7/2024, being in breach of the appellant’s right to fair hearing, is hereby set aside for being a nullity.
“The sole issue for determination is thus resolved in favour of the appellant, and against the respondents. In the light of the holding that the judgment delivered on July 30, 2024 was a nullity, the determination of the other issues raised in this appeal, obviously, have become merely academic. This court will therefore, refrain from considering them.
“The appeal has merit, and it is hereby allowed. The lower court’s proceedings of 18/7/2024, as well as the judgment of July 7, 2024, are hereby set aside.
“It is ordered that the matter be remitted back to the Hon. Chief Judge of the lower court for hearing de novo before another Judge of the lower court. It is further ordered that parties shall bear their costs.”
Post A Comment: