The continued detention of former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) has intensified debate over the anti-graft agency’s adherence to due process, with critics accusing it of adopting an “arrest-detain-investigate-then-prosecute” approach in politically sensitive cases.
The controversy deepened this week after the ICPC publicly denied claims that El-Rufai suffered a nosebleed while in custody, insisting the allegation was false and maintaining that the former governor remains in detention in connection with ongoing corruption investigations linked to his tenure. The commission has said the detention followed his transfer from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and is tied to continuing investigative and legal processes.
But legal observers and political actors say the central issue is no longer the health dispute — it is the principle of whether a high-profile suspect should be arrested and held for extended periods while investigators continue to assemble their case.
Under Nigerian law, agencies may arrest on reasonable suspicion and seek court-backed remand while investigations continue. Yet in practice, courts and rights advocates have repeatedly cautioned that detention must not become a substitute for diligent pre-arrest investigation, particularly in complex financial or corruption matters where documentary evidence is typically available before any custodial action.
For critics, the optics of the El-Rufai case reinforce longstanding concerns about the criminal justice process in politically exposed investigations: arrest first, build the case later. They argue that such sequencing risks reputational damage, fuels perceptions of selective enforcement and undermines public confidence in anti-corruption institutions.
Questions have also arisen over the duration and basis of the former governor’s custody. Associates have complained about access and the length of detention, while court proceedings connected to the matter have reportedly been adjourned, prolonging the legal uncertainty surrounding his status. The ICPC, however, maintains that the detention is lawful and tied to ongoing investigative steps ahead of formal arraignment.
The broader concern extends beyond one individual. Nigeria’s appellate courts have in past rulings warned enforcement agencies against using remand and prolonged custody as investigative tools rather than last-resort measures where immediate arrest is necessary. Civil-rights advocates say the El-Rufai episode risks reviving fears of “holding charge” practices — where suspects are detained while prosecutors search for sufficient evidence.
Whether the ICPC ultimately files charges supported by strong proof or releases the former governor without prosecution will likely determine how history judges this episode. For now, the case has become another flashpoint in Nigeria’s perennial tension between aggressive anti-corruption enforcement and the constitutional safeguards of liberty and presumption of innocence.
As the legal process unfolds, the central question persists: in the pursuit of accountability, can the state afford to appear to arrest first and investigate later — or must it demonstrate that due process remains paramount, even in cases involving powerful political figures?
Abuja Network News
Tags
News