According to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), the judge held that the defence’s right to a fair hearing could be protected by allowing it to cross-examine the witness.

The ruling followed objections by El-Rufai’s senior counsel, Paul Erokoro, who argued that the defence had not received the witness’ evidence summary or the subpoena.

El-Rufai arrived at court amid heavy security, accompanied by his wife, Asiya El-Rufai, and Isa Ashiru Kudan, the governorship candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) in Kaduna State.

El-Rufai appeared in court for the continuation of his trial over allegations of corruption, abuse of office and money laundering. The proceedings lasted about eight hours, with the former governor seen leaving the court after nightfall.

The ICIR reports that the court overruled the former governor and adjourned the case to November 30, 2026, meaning that El-Rufai returned to the custody of the ICPC. The former governor is expected to appear before the Federal High Court in Kaduna, presided over by a judge, Hauwa Buhari, in another case involving the ICPC tomorrow.

The ICPC prosecution counsel, Ayodele Adedipe, however, argued that failure to include a subpoenaed witness in the proof of evidence did not automatically render the testimony inadmissible.

In its ruling, the court confirmed that the witness had been subpoenaed through an order signed by the court on June 30, 2026.

Khobo said the prosecution’s position reflected the applicable law, citing previous cases in support of the ruling.

The judge held that the witness’ absence from the prosecution’s witness list and evidence summary did not prevent him from testifying because he had been subpoenaed.

He added that the defence’s fair-hearing concerns could be addressed by allowing it to cross-examine the witness.

Earlier, the SSS digital forensic examiner, Shegun Kayode, testified about a forensic examination of communication records and audio recordings allegedly linked to the defendant.

Kayode told the court that specialised software revealed two-way communications involving El-Rufai and suspected associates, including Bashir El-Rufai and another person, between October 25 and 28, 2025.

He said the findings prompted further analysis of audio recordings received from a communication intelligence server.

The witness explained that he immediately created a forensic image of the original audio file, sealed it and secured it to preserve its technical integrity.

Kayode said subsequent software examination showed that the audio was authentic and had not been artificially generated or manipulated using artificial intelligence.

During the proceedings, an audio recording of his interrogation by the SSS concerning the alleged importation of about 10 kilogrammes of thallium sulphate, a highly toxic and strictly regulated substance, into Nigeria was played.

The recording, which lasted about one hour and 30 minutes, contained the interrogation and other exchanges.

The case was adjourned until November 30 and December 1 for continuation of the cross-examination of the SSS witness by the defence counsel.

Addressing journalists after the court proceedings, Adedipe said the prosecution had opened its case by calling its first witness, a forensic expert.

He said the witness testified and tendered a forensic investigation report before cross-examination commenced.

Adedipe explained that the proceedings took considerable time because of objections and legal arguments but said the prosecution was able to conclude its presentation with the witness for the day.

He confirmed that the case had been adjourned until November 30 and December 1 for continuation of cross-examination.

Similarly, Erokoro, counsel to El-Rufai, said the prosecution had opened its case and called its first witness, adding that the lengthy proceedings showed the parties’ commitment to ensuring the trial progressed.

He expressed confidence that his client would be discharged and acquitted of all the charges.

Erokoro said the defence had begun examining the witness’s testimony and would continue to scrutinise the evidence when the court reconvened.

He maintained that the next hearing would provide the defence with an opportunity to test the accuracy and credibility of the prosecution’s evidence. (NAN)