…El-Rufai’s constitutional right to a fair hearing was breached in the proceedings of the lower court, the appellate court ruled.
KADUNA, NIGERIA- The iNews Times | El-Rufai has secured a fresh hearing in his fundamental rights suit after the Court of Appeal sitting in Kaduna set aside the earlier judgment of the Federal High Court and directed that the case be reassigned to another judge.
In a unanimous decision delivered on March 17, a Certified True Copy obtained by The iNews Times on Friday showed that El-Rufai’s constitutional right to a fair hearing was breached in the proceedings of the lower court, the appellate court ruled.
The three-member panel, comprising Justices Onyekachi Otisi, Abimbola Obaseki-Adejumo and Sybil Gbagi, nullified the entire proceedings and the July 30, 2024 judgment of the trial court.
El-Rufai had filed the appeal, marked CA/K/240/2024, against the Kaduna State House of Assembly and the state Attorney General, following a probe by an ad hoc committee of the Assembly into the state government’s financial dealings, loans and contracts between May 29, 2015 and May 29, 2023.
The committee had indicted El-Rufai over an alleged N400bn fraud, prompting him to approach the Federal High Court on the grounds that he was neither invited nor given an opportunity to defend himself, despite the panel issuing recommendations affecting him.
However, the trial court declined jurisdiction and transferred the matter to the Kaduna State High Court, a move that triggered the appeal.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Otisi held that the core issue was whether the trial court could assume jurisdiction without evidence that the appellant had been properly served with a hearing notice.
The appellate court ruled that there was no credible proof of service, stressing that such proof must be established through an affidavit or other verifiable documentary evidence.
It faulted the claim by the respondents that notice was served via a text message to the appellant’s counsel, noting discrepancies in the phone numbers presented.
The court also criticised reliance on oral assertions by a court registrar without supporting documents, describing the approach as legally insufficient.
According to the court, failure to serve hearing notice denied El-Rufai the opportunity to participate in proceedings and respond to key filings, including a counter-affidavit relied upon by the trial court.
The panel further held that the lower court worsened the breach by proceeding to hear and determine the substantive matter on the same day it deemed the respondents’ processes properly filed, thereby denying the appellant the statutory five days required to respond on points of law.
Describing the proceedings as fundamentally flawed, the court emphasised that while speedy dispensation of justice is important, it must not come at the expense of constitutional safeguards.
Consequently, the appellate court declared the entire proceedings null and void and ordered a retrial of the case before a different judge of the Federal High Court, with each party directed to bear its own costs.
In their concurring opinions, Justices Obaseki-Adejumo and Gbagi affirmed the lead judgment, underscoring the necessity of proper service of court processes and endorsing the order for a fresh hearing.
