In the matter of The Federal Republic of Nigeria Versus Mallam Nasir el-Rufa’i, the prosecution does not need to prove that the wiretapping by Nasir el-Rufa’i’s criminal gang occurred.
By virtue of the Evidence Act, admissions are considered facts which do need to be proved.
It would be helpful if the prosecution proved the admission, but it is not necessary.
Such admissions, as long as they were made voluntarily and not preceded in writing or verbally by the caveat, “Without prejudice”, fall outside the hearsay rule.
Also, the prosecution would not have to prove that Mallam Nasir el-Rufa’i’s actions were unlawful, because el-Rufa’i himself admitted that he was aware of their illegality.
The interview said, “That technically is illegal”, to which Mr el-Rufa’i responded, “I know”.
Right there, the prosecution is no longer under any burden to prove that the action was unlawful, other than citing the section of the Cybercrime Act, 2015 (as amended), and the Constitution that makes it unlawful.
Finally, the prosecution does not have to prove that Mr el-Rufa’i participated in the crime. By his own admission, he has established that.
Generally speaking, almost all admissions made out of court need some corroborative evidence, no matter how slight, to result in a conviction. And in this case, all the prosecution needs to do is point out that Nasir el-Rufa’i gave an interview to BBC Hausa on Wednesday, February 11, 2026, in which he stated that he would be arrested soon.
The prosecution can argue that that is sufficient corroboration, even though Nasir el-Rufa’i can counterargue that he made that admission on the strength of the letter he had received from the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.
The counter by the prosecution to that would be that since Mr el-Rufa’i had already written to the EFCC that he would honour their investigation, and since the EFCC had not indicated in any way, shape, or form that he would be arrested, he could not have been afraid of an arrest by them, and that his fear of arrest was from another agency, and that information was founded on foreknowledge from the wiretaps he received from his criminal gang.
The case of The Federal Republic of Nigeria Versus Mallam Nasir el-Rufa’i is not watertight. Still, in my opinion, the state has more than enough grounds to secure a conviction.
𝗙𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄 𝗢𝘂𝗿 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁𝘀𝗔𝗽𝗽 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗹 𝗧𝗼 𝗚𝗲𝘁 𝗟𝗮𝘁𝗲𝘀𝘁 𝗡𝗲𝘄𝘀 𝗔𝘀 𝗜𝘁'𝘀 𝗗𝗿𝗼𝗽!
