Court Rejects El-Rufai's Medical Bail Bid, Orders Continued Custody

The High Court of Kaduna State has once again dismissed a bail application filed by former Kaduna State Governor, Mallam Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai. The application was made within the context of ongoing criminal proceedings brought against him by the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) .

Honourable Justice D. H. Khobo delivered the considered ruling on June 29, 2026. This decision marked the court's refusal of the defendant’s third separate application for bail, which was brought specifically on medical grounds.

A central issue heavily evaluated by the court during the proceedings was the authenticity and substance of the medical report. Mallam El-Rufai had relied primarily on this document to support his request for release.

The report, annexed to the application as Exhibit “A” and purportedly issued by the National Hospital, Abuja, claimed that the former governor had been diagnosed with advanced metastatic prostate cancer requiring specialised treatment that was allegedly unavailable anywhere in Nigeria.

In opposing the application, the ICPC presented documentary evidence from the Chief Medical Director of the National Hospital, Abuja, Professor Muhammad Raji Mahmud, disowning the document relied upon by the defendant.

According to the document issued by the Chief Medical Director, a comprehensive search of the hospital’s electronic medical records and patient indexes revealed no hospital number, patient file, billing record, consultation history or any evidence that the defendant had ever been treated at the facility.

The hospital further confirmed that the report was issued without the knowledge or authorisation of its management.

Based on this evidence, the court held that the credibility and reliability of the medical report had been fundamentally undermined. Justice Khobo noted that a document formally disowned by the medical institution on whose letterhead it was issued could not legally serve as the basis for the exceptional relief sought by the applicant. Consequently, the court rejected the document as a valid piece of evidence for the bail application.

With the complete collapse of that evidential foundation, the court found no reliable and institutionally validated material facts to justify the exercise of judicial discretion in favor of bail on health grounds. The judge emphasized that applications based on medical emergencies require verifiable proof from authentic authorities. Because the defense failed to provide credible documentation, the legal requirements to grant bail under special circumstances were not met.

In refusing the application, the court ordered the commission to continue providing the defendant with unrestricted access to his personal medical practitioners. The ruling also directed the agency to ensure he is escorted to any specialized diagnostic or clinical facility of his choice within Nigeria, as required, throughout the pendency of the trial. The commission noted that this order is consistent with its existing practice and reaffirmed its commitment to full compliance.

The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) welcomed the high court's ruling as a critical reinforcement of judicial integrity, noting that the decision firmly establishes that health-based bail requests must be anchored in verifiable evidence rather than institutional misrepresentation. According to an official statement, the commission reaffirmed its dedication to carrying out high-profile anti-corruption prosecutions with strict professionalism, fairness, and a commitment to constitutional democracy. By ensuring that the defendant retains supervised access to specialized medical care, the anti-graft agency emphasized that the prosecution will proceed in a manner that protects fundamental human rights while rigorously upholding the supremacy of the rule of law.