The Federal Government has filed criminal charges against former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, accusing him of unlawfully intercepting the phone communications of the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, and making admissions to that effect during a televised interview.

Court documents filed at the Federal High Court of Nigeria show that the case, dated February 16, 2026, was instituted by the Federal Republic of Nigeria in the Abuja Judicial Division.

Prosecutors alleged that El-Rufai, 65, committed multiple offences under Nigeria’s cybercrime and communications laws.

According to the charge sheet, the first count relates to an appearance by the defendant on Arise TV’s Prime Time programme on February 13, 2026.

During the interview, he allegedly admitted that he and unnamed associates unlawfully intercepted the telephone communications of Ribadu.

The prosecution argues that this admission constitutes an offence under Section 12(1) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024.

Furthermore, in the second count, the government alleged that El-Rufai stated during the same broadcast that he was aware of, and maintained contact with, an individual responsible for intercepting the NSA’s communications.

Prosecutors contend that his failure to report the individual to security agencies violated Section 27(b) of the amended Cybercrimes Act.

The third count broadens the allegations, claiming that El-Rufai and others still at large used technical equipment or systems in 2026 to compromise public safety and national security.

The charge asserts that the alleged interception created reasonable apprehension of insecurity among Nigerians, contrary to Section 131(2) of the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003.

The case, if proven, could test the scope of Nigeria’s amended cybercrime legislation, particularly provisions dealing with unlawful interception and national security implications.

Moreover, the prosecution appears to rely heavily on statements purportedly made during the televised interview as evidentiary material.

As of press time, it was not immediately clear when the defendant would be arraigned.

However, the filing signals a significant escalation in the legal dispute surrounding the alleged surveillance of the National Security Adviser’s communications.