The Counsel to the former Governor of Kaduna state, Malam Nasir El-Rufai, Paul Erokoro (SAN), has apologized to the State High Court sitting in Kaduna on Wednesday.

The counsel sought the court permission to discontinue the three applications earlier filed by the defendant’s legal team.

Erokoro has also filled a fresh application in the ongoing corrupt allegation instituted against El-rufai by the Federal Government of Nigeria.

As the sitting continues before Justice Darius Khobo, El-Rufai’s lawyer, in his submissions admitted that the pending applications are combative in nature.

While apologizing for bothering the court, he mentioned that he could not adopt some of the languages used in the applications earlier filed by the legal team of the defendant.

Erokoro who just took over the case, explained that he had studied all the applications filed earlier, but due to their confrontational nature, hence the need to file a fresh application.

He pleaded for more time to file a new application, just as he sought the permission to withdraw the three pending applications earlier filed.

While fielding questions from journalists shortly after the court sitting, one of the prosecution counsels, Ibrahim Muktar explained that between the adjourned day till date, two more applications were filed on the same issue, asking the judge to requise himself.

Muktar who frowned at the filling of fresh application by El-Rufai’s new counsel, described such action as a delay method, adding that as prosecutors, and in the interest of justice, they have a duty to prosecute without any delay.

He explained further that the matter came up on the 6th of July for hearing with all the witnesses ready, however, the defense’s counsel filed an application with other series of applications aiming at frustrating the trial.

“Charge has been filed, prosecution is ready, defense is bringing multiple application and that is what is destroying the time, frustrating the prosecution from commencing the trial, we would have gone far if not because of these applications,” the counsel explained.

Following the plea by El-Rufai’s new counsel for more time to file a new application, the case has been adjourned to 22nd day of July,2026 for hearing.

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday ordered the final forfeiture of 48 properties, including a university, linked to Mr Abubakar Malami, former Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, to the Federal Government.

Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, in a ruling, held that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission’s, EFCC, had been able to prove that the properties were reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

Justice Abdulmalik held that Malami had failed to show that the properties were acquired through lawful sources.

Earlier, the judge dismissed several applications, motions on notice and applications to show cause filed by Mr Malami, his family members and some companies linked to the properties, describing them as “wanting in merit.”

She held that the issue before the court was not “who owns the properties, but how legitimate are the funds used to acquire the properties.”

According to the judge, the respondents had “not dislodged the reasonable suspicion that the properties were acquired by unlawful activities.”

Justice Abdulmalik relied on Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act in granting the final forfeiture order.

The judge, however, vacated the interim forfeiture order in respect of nine other properties sought to be forfeited by the EFCC.

She held that the anti-graft agency was unable to prove that the nine properties located in Kebbi and Kaduna State were gotten through unlawful activities.

Justice Abdulmalik had fixed today for judgment in the forfeiture suit filed by the EFCC against 57 properties linked to Malami.

The anti-graft agency had, in the suit, sought the final forfeiture of the properties for reasonably suspected to be proceeds of unlawful activities.

Justice Emeka Nwite had, on Jan. 16, made an order for interim forfeiture of the 57 properties after Ekele Iheanacho, SAN, moved the motion ex-parte.

The EFCC instituted the suit, seeking the permanent forfeiture of the 57 properties worth N212.8 billion.

Following the publication of the interim order, Malami, his wife Nana Hadiza, his son, Abdulaziz, and several companies linked to the properties filed objections.

They urged the court to dismiss the EFCC’s application and set aside the interim forfeiture order, arguing that it was wrongly granted.

They also argued that the properties were lawfully acquired and that the EFCC failed to establish any connection between the assets and any unlawful activity.

‘

By Yusuf Danjuma Yunusa

A social media post by Senator Ahmad Ibrahim Lawan,the former Senate President celebrating the recruitment of two constituents into the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA) has ignited a fierce online debate, raising critical questions about political ethics, meritocracy, and the security protocols surrounding Nigeria’s intelligence community.

Senator Lawan, representing Yobe North Senatorial District, took to Facebook on the 14th of July, 2026, to share photos and a statement detailing his role in facilitating the employment of Abdulsalam Shafiu Yaro and Abdullahi Sani Machina. In the post, he recounted meeting the young men after plenary, noting that their recruitment was “facilitated” with the DIA. He praised their character and charged them to be exemplary ambassadors of their district.

However, the celebratory post quickly drew sharp criticism when it was shared by biologist Abdulrazak Ibrahim, who simply captioned it: “Is this ethical?”

The comment section on Mr. Ibrahim’s wall became a microcosm of the larger national discourse, with netizens split on two primary issues: the propriety of a sitting lawmaker publicly admitting to securing jobs for individuals, and the potential security risks of publicly identifying new intelligence officers.

The Ethics of ‘Facilitation’ vs. Merit

The first wave of criticism targeted the Senator’s admission of direct influence in the hiring process. Critics argued that such actions undermine the principles of a fair and transparent civil service.

Commenter Ibrahim Mohammed voiced a common sentiment, stating, “Of all people, a Lawmaker should know better.” This was echoed by Rejoice Iyasco, who questioned the process with a pointed query: “Facilitated not merited?”

While some, like Aliyu Jalal and a commenter named Vicky, dismissed the controversy as par for the course in Nigeria’s political landscape—with Vicky noting, “Yes, given the Nigeria of today, it is a big flex”—others maintained that the act, regardless of intention, sets a dangerous precedent.

Security Breach: Exposing Intelligence Operatives

A more severe criticism centered on the Senator’s decision to publicly display the faces and names of the new DIA employees.

Commenters argued that the public exposure contradicts the covert nature of intelligence work. Nate Alford raised the alarm, stating, “These gentlemen are supposed to operate under the radar due to the sensitivity of their work. Is it anything that is politics?”

Similarly, Amos Adziba questioned the logic of the post, asking, “I thought defence intelligence agency (DIA) is a secret organisation?” This point was further emphasized by Saminu Giwa, who stated, “I thought they were not supposed to be exposed according to the working ethics?”

The Distinction Between Recommendation and Influence

The debate over the Senator’s role was further refined by internet governance advocate Muhammad Bello Buhari. In response to a defense of the Senator’s actions, Mr. Buhari drew a distinction between a professional recommendation and what he termed “something completely opposite.”

“But a recommendation is absolutely different from this,” Mr. Buhari wrote. “In fact, recommendations are very ethical. They speak to the character and experience of the candidate. Employers usually ask that.” He added, “And to speak of intelligence Officers and even posting their faces and names! This is utterly embarrassing.”

In his original post, Senator Lawan framed his actions as a fulfillment of his commitment to youth empowerment. He described the recruits as “bright, disciplined, and eager to serve,” adding that “seeing the joy and renewed sense of purpose in Abdulsalam and Abdullahi’s eyes reminded me of why I remain deeply committed to creating opportunities for our youth.”

He charged the men to “remain loyal to the Constitution” and to discharge their responsibilities “with the highest level of professionalism.”

The incident highlights the ongoing tension in Nigeria between the political class’s penchant for “constituency projects” and the demand for a technocratic, merit-based civil service. Furthermore, it underscores the need for public officials to be mindful of the security implications of their social media activity, particularly regarding individuals serving in sensitive national security roles.

As of the time of filing this report, the DIA has not issued an official statement regarding the recruitment process or the public posting of their new officers’ identities. Also, the Senator in question has not make any further comments or post regarding the backlash.