Skip to main content Skip to footer 
Kaduna, Nigeria — Former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, has formally petitioned the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, Justice John Tsoho, alleging gross bias and denial of fair hearing by Justice Rilwanu Aikawa. El-Rufai’s petition seeks to transfer his fundamental human rights suit, marked FHC/KD/CS/55/2024, to another judge.
Filed by his counsel, Adetayo Adeyemo, the petition dated July 18, 2024, contends that procedural irregularities and perceived partiality have compromised the justice process. El-Rufai’s case was initially set for hearing on July 8, 2024, shortly after the suit was filed on June 26, 2024.
During the first hearing, the applicant’s counsel, S.S. Umoru, confirmed that all parties had been served and were within their filing deadlines. However, the first respondent’s counsel, Sule Shaibu (SAN), admitted they had not filed their response and were one day late. The hearing was subsequently adjourned to July 17.
On July 17, El-Rufai’s principal counsel, A.U. Mustapha (SAN), traveled from Lagos to Kaduna for the hearing, only to be informed that the court would not be sitting. Later that night, El-Rufai’s team learned through the news that the case was rescheduled for July 18.
Due to the short notice, El-Rufai filed for an adjournment and served the court and all parties involved. Despite this, the court proceeded with the hearing on July 18 without notifying El-Rufai, during which the respondents adopted their processes in the absence of the applicant.
El-Rufai argues that the lack of proper notification and the court’s decision to proceed without his presence reflect extreme bias and a denial of fair hearing. He emphasized that service of hearing notices is a fundamental right, and the court’s actions have eroded his confidence in Justice Aikawa’s impartiality.
The petition requests a transfer of the case to another judge, asserting that “justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done.” El-Rufai’s allegations include the court’s refusal to provide him with the opportunity to respond to the first respondent’s counter-affidavit and written address.
As of now, Justice John Tsoho has not publicly responded to the petition, and it remains to be seen how the judiciary will address these serious allegations.
