The Court of Appeal has reaffirmed the constitutional right to fair hearing of former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, setting aside an earlier judgment delivered by the Federal High Court in Kaduna.
In a ruling on appeal number CA/K/240/2024, the appellate court overturned the decision of Justice R.M. Aikawa, declaring that the lower court erred in law by proceeding with a hearing without properly notifying the appellant.
The development was disclosed on Tuesday by El-Rufai’s media adviser, Muyiwa Adekeye.
According to the court, the Federal High Court went ahead with proceedings on July 18, 2024, without valid proof that El-Rufai had been served hearing notice. This, the court held, denied him the opportunity to respond to the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents, including the Kaduna State House of Assembly.
Consequently, the appellate court nullified the proceedings of that day and set aside the judgment delivered on July 30, 2024, citing lack of jurisdiction.
The court further ordered that the case be remitted to the Federal High Court for reassignment to another judge for a fresh hearing.
El-Rufai had instituted the fundamental rights enforcement suit in 2024, challenging the Kaduna State House of Assembly over alleged denial of fair hearing during its investigative proceedings against him.
The trial court had earlier adjourned the matter but later proceeded in his absence, granting the respondents’ applications without allowing him to file necessary responses.
Arguing his appeal through his counsel, A.U. Mustapha (SAN), El-Rufai maintained that the matter was improperly heard during court vacation without due application and that the trial judge declined to recuse himself despite objections.
In resolving the appeal, the Court of Appeal identified two key issues—proper service of hearing notice and denial of the opportunity to file further affidavits.
On the issue of service, the court stressed that only officially provided contact details of parties are valid for serving notices, noting that there was no evidence El-Rufai was duly served.
Regarding the second issue, the court held that under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, the appellant was entitled to file a further affidavit and respond on points of law within five days. It ruled that the trial court lacked the discretion to deny him this right.
The judgment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to upholding due process and protecting fundamental human rights in Nigeria’s legal system.