The family of Nasir el-Rufai says no phone-tapping equipment was recovered from the Abuja residence of the former Kaduna governor during a search conducted by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).
In February, the ex-governor said “someone tapped” the phone of Nuhu Ribadu, national security adviser, allowing him to listen to a conversation in which the NSA “ordered” his arrest.
El-Rufai acknowledged the action was illegal but claimed the government routinely engages in similar practices without court orders.
On February 19, the ICPC, which is probing the former governor over alleged financial improprieties during his tenure as governor of Kaduna state between 2015 and 2023, raided his home in Abuja.
In an affidavit, the ICPC would later tell the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) high court that it found phone-tapping equipment in the former governor’s home during the search.
“During the Search operations, the Commission retrieved electronic magnetic equipment capable of tapping conversations, and he was asked to give consent to enable the Commission access to the equipment, but he refused,” the document reads.
However, in a statement issued on Monday, el-Rufai’s family described the anti-graft claim as “falsehoods”.
The family said only old personal mobile phones, flash drives and laptops were taken from the house.
“We were present when these items were seized. No equipment other than old discarded personal mobile phones — some dating back as much as 20 years — and storage devices like flash drives and laptops, which are standard possessions of any 21st-century citizen, were removed from the property,” the statement reads.
The family also accused the commission of attempting to portray el-Rufai’s decision to remain silent during questioning as non-cooperation.
Citing the 1999 Constitution, el-Rufai’s family argued that every citizen has the right to remain silent, noting that no adverse inference should be drawn from exercising that right.
The family further alleged that the search was conducted based on a “legally defective” warrant, claiming it was fraudulently procured.
They said their lawyers have challenged the warrant in court and are seeking legal remedies over what they described as an illegal search and defamatory statements.
