The Court of Appeal sitting in Kaduna has set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court in a suit involving former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai, after finding that his constitutional right to fair hearing was breached during the proceedings.
In its ruling on appeal number CA/K/240/2024, the appellate court held that the proceedings conducted by the lower court on July 18, 2024, were fundamentally defective because hearing notice was not properly served on the appellant before the matter was heard.
The court further ruled that denying El-Rufai the opportunity to respond to the respondents’ counter-affidavit amounted to a clear violation of his right to fair hearing as guaranteed under the Constitution.
As a result, the appellate court declared the judgment delivered on July 30, 2024, by Justice R.M. Aikawa of the Federal High Court a nullity, holding that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to proceed under those circumstances.
The court subsequently ordered that the case be returned to the Federal High Court for reassignment to another judge and a fresh hearing.
Background to the Dispute
El-Rufai had approached the Federal High Court in 2024 seeking the enforcement of his fundamental rights, alleging that the Kaduna State House of Assembly denied him fair hearing during its investigative proceedings.
However, although the case had earlier been adjourned, the lower court proceeded to hear the matter on July 18 without proper notification to the former governor.
In his absence, the court granted the respondents’ application for extension of time, entertained the substantive matter, and later declined jurisdiction on the basis that the claims extended beyond issues of fundamental rights enforcement.
The matter was thereafter transferred to the Kaduna State High Court.
Grounds of Appeal
Dissatisfied with the ruling, El-Rufai, through his counsel, A.U. Mustapha (SAN), challenged the decision at the Court of Appeal, arguing that the proceedings were conducted without proper notice and that he was denied the opportunity to fully present his case.
In resolving the appeal, the appellate court stressed that service of hearing notice is not a mere procedural formality but a fundamental condition that directly affects the jurisdiction of any court.
According to the court, there was no credible evidence showing that El-Rufai had been served with the hearing notice before proceedings commenced.
The justices further held that under the Fundamental Rights (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, the appellant was entitled to file a further affidavit and respond on points of law after the respondents regularised their filings.
Denying him that opportunity, the court ruled, amounted to a serious breach of due process and rendered the proceedings legally unsustainable.
About the Author
