Former Kaduna Governor Accused of Allocating $600,000 to Influence EFCC Probe

Allegations Presented in Court During a hearing at the Kaduna State High Court, a forensic investigator identified as Segun Kayode alleged that former Kaduna State governor Nasir El‑Rufai and a group of close associates earmarked a total of $600,000 for the purpose of settling Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) officials and related intermediaries. The witness broke down the sum into two portions – $500,000 and $100,000 – and said that forensic audio recordings captured discussions about the disbursement.

Content of the Recordings According to Kayode, the recordings centred on attempts to obstruct an EFCC investigation into a company referred to as Singularity. The investigator named a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, identified as AU Mustapha (SAN), as well as Jimi Lawal and Bashir El‑Rufai as individuals mentioned in the conversations. The audio allegedly showed directives for Mustapha and Lawal to meet a person called Ahmadu Sule to obtain a template previously used to liquidate another firm, with the intention of applying the same method to Singularity.

Proposed Liquidation Plans The testimony further suggested that the discussions included plans to dissolve the target company both in Nigeria and in Mauritius, where the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit was reportedly conducting its own inquiry. In addition, Kayode claimed the recordings referenced efforts to prevent the EFCC from probing a separate entity listed on the New York Stock Exchange.

Court Proceedings The hearing, presided over by Justice Darius Khobo, lasted close to eight hours, with roughly two hours devoted to playing the recorded material. El‑Rufai’s lead counsel, Paul Erokoro (SAN), raised objections to the evidence, though the court has not yet ruled on the veracity of the allegations. Both Punch and Channels TV note that the claims form part of the prosecution’s case and remain to be established by the judiciary.

Context and Implications If substantiated, the alleged payment scheme would represent a significant attempt to interfere with the EFCC’s anti‑corruption mandate. However, the court has so far treated the accusations as unproven, and the defence maintains that the evidence is insufficient to warrant a conviction. The outcome of the trial will likely influence public perception of political accountability in Nigeria’s northern states.