The Court of Appeal sitting in Kaduna has ordered a fresh trial in the fundamental rights suit filed by former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, over the alleged N400 billion fraud case.
The appellate court set aside the earlier judgment of the Federal High Court and directed that the matter be heard again by another judge.
In its ruling delivered on March 17, the court held that the earlier proceedings violated El-Rufai’s right to fair hearing. It said the foundation of the case was flawed from the beginning.
The case stems from an investigation by the Kaduna State House of Assembly. The Assembly had set up an ad hoc committee to probe financial dealings of the state government between 2015 and 2023. The panel later indicted El-Rufai over an alleged N400bn fraud.
Following the indictment, El-Rufai approached the Federal High Court. He argued that he was never invited by the committee despite the fact that several individuals were called to appear.
He maintained that the panel went ahead to make findings against him without giving him a chance to defend himself.
However, the trial court declined jurisdiction and transferred the case to the Kaduna State High Court. That decision led to the appeal.
In its judgment, the Court of Appeal said there was no proof that El-Rufai was properly served with a hearing notice. It described service of court processes as a fundamental requirement for any valid proceeding.
The court ruled that failure to properly notify a party robs the court of jurisdiction. It added that any action taken under such conditions becomes invalid.
“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 a hearing notice was sent through a text message to El-Rufai’s lawyer. But the appellate court rejected that argument. It pointed out inconsistencies in the phone numbers presented and said there was no solid evidence to support the claim.
The court also faulted reliance on oral statements by a court official without proper documentation. It said such an approach does not meet legal standards.
According to the judgment, the failure to serve hearing notice denied El-Rufai the opportunity to respond to filings, including a counter-affidavit used against him.
“Failure to serve court process, such as a hearing notice, goes to the root of the case. It is a condition precedent to the assumption of jurisdiction,” the court stated.
The appellate court further criticised the speed at which the trial court handled the matter. It noted that the lower court proceeded to determine the case on the same day it accepted the respondents’ filings.
It said El-Rufai was entitled to time to respond, especially to points of law raised against him. The court stressed that such timelines cannot be ignored.
Describing the entire process as defective, the court declared the proceedings null and void. It then ordered that the case be heard afresh before a different judge of the Federal High Court.
The court also directed all parties involved to bear their respective costs.
In separate concurring judgments, other justices of the panel agreed with the decision. They emphasised the importance of proper service and fair hearing in judicial proceedings.
