Appeal Court Orders Retrial of El-Rufai's Case

The Court of Appeal in Abuja yesterday ordered the Federal High Court to re-hear the fundamental human rights enforcement case against the Senate filed by a former Minister of the Federal capital Territory (FCT),  Mallam Nasir el-Rufai. The court set aside the judgment of the lower court which had in 2010 thrown out the case.

Ruling in favour of el-Rufai, the court directed the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court to appoint another judge to hear the case.

The original suit was filed in August 2008 to challenge the decisions and recommendations of the Senate committee established to hold investigative public hearings on the affairs of the FCT between 1999 and 2007, but which essentially targeted el-Rufai.

The committee invited el-Rufai as a witness and not as a defendant. But in its report, the committee went ahead to recommend punishment and other sanctions against el-Rufai without making available to him the petitions against him, or placing before him any instances of violations of the law for his response.

By acting in this prejudicial manner, the Senate committee, and eventually the entire Senate in accepting the committee's recommendations, had violated el-Rufai's constitutionally guaranteed rights.

The former minister therefore approached the courts to defend and uphold his rights.
He sued the Senate and five other parties: the Senate president, Senator Sodangi, the Clerk of the National Assembly, the Minister of the FCT and the Attorney-General of the Federation.

The respondents did not dispute the substance of these rights violations but they resorted to legal technicalities.

They told the trial court that el-Rufai's legal action came too late because it was not filed within three months of "the commencement of the breach" as required by the Public Officers Protection Act. They further claimed that all the defendants are public officers, and are therefore protected by the Act against such actions.

Justice M. G. Umar agreed with their arguments. On March 11, 2010, he declined to hear the substantive case of the violation of el-Rufai's fundamental rights, deciding that it was 'statute-barred'.
Bamidele Aturu, counsel to El Rufai, disagreed and lodged an appeal at the Court of Appeal.
After four years of legal arguments, the appellate court decided the appeal yesterday. The panel of three justices unanimously decided that the trial judge erred in ruling that any statute is capable of abridging fundamental rights. They therefore allowed the appeal and directed that the suit be remitted back to another judge of the Federal High Court to hear the substantive suit.

While  reacting to the decision, el-Rufai said: "This judgment is another contribution to human rights jurisprudence in this country. We are gratified that the Court of Appeal saw through attempts by public officers to avoid responsibility for their abuse of the rights of citizens using various stratagems.