
Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) has arraigned Nasir el-Rufai on an amended nine-count charge, escalating an already complex legal battle tied to allegations of fraud and abuse of office.
The former Kaduna State governor appeared before a state high court on Monday, where prosecutors presented revised charges that now exclude a previously named co-defendant, Amadu Sule.
According to defence counsel Ukpong Abang, the amended charges were served in court on the same day, leaving the legal team little time to review the new allegations.
“The charges are entirely new to us,” Abang told journalists after the proceedings, explaining that the late submission prevented the case from moving forward to a full hearing.
With the revised charges now focusing solely on el-Rufai, the court proceeded to take his plea and consider a bail application before adjourning the matter.
Justice Darius Khobo fixed April 14 for the hearing of the bail application, effectively pausing substantive proceedings until the defence has had time to study the updated case.

The development introduces a new phase in the prosecution’s strategy, raising questions about why one defendant was dropped and how the revised charges reshape the case.
ADC relocates national convention in Abuja after Venue drama
The Kaduna proceedings are only one part of a broader legal challenge facing el-Rufai.
He is also expected to appear before a Federal High Court in Kaduna over a separate set of charges filed by the ICPC, including allegations of fraud and money laundering.
In that earlier case, filed in March, el-Rufai and another defendant, Joel Adoga, pleaded not guilty.
The overlap of multiple cases across different courts signals an intensifying legal scrutiny that could have wider political implications, particularly given el-Rufai’s prominence in Nigeria’s political landscape.
As both cases progress, attention will likely focus not just on the allegations themselves, but on how the prosecution builds its case, and whether the defence can effectively challenge the shifting legal strategy.