A supporter of former Kaduna State Governor Nasir El-Rufai, Mal. Imran U. Wakili, has questioned the outcome of the investigations involving the former governor by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC).
Wakili made the remarks in a post on X, claiming that El-Rufai had been subjected to prolonged questioning by both anti-corruption agencies for more than 200 days.
He wrote that the former governor, who previously served as a presidential adviser, Director-General of the Bureau of Public Enterprises and Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, had been “thoroughly grilled” by the two agencies.
According to Wakili, despite the prolonged investigations, there had been no publicly reported seizure of property or confiscation of large amounts of cash from El-Rufai.
He specifically claimed that investigators found only old BlackBerry phones and bank tokens, questioning what he portrayed as the outcome of the investigations.
The remarks come amid ongoing legal and investigative scrutiny of El-Rufai. Recent reports have linked the former governor to investigations by both the EFCC and ICPC, while his supporters have continued to challenge the allegations against him.
El-Rufai, who served as Kaduna governor from 2015 to 2023, previously served as Minister of the Federal Capital Territory and Director-General of the Bureau of Public Enterprises.
Reports have also emerged concerning an ICPC investigation involving alleged surveillance or wiretapping equipment reportedly recovered during searches connected to El-Rufai. However, the circumstances and evidentiary significance of items reportedly recovered remain matters for the relevant investigative and judicial processes.
Wakili's claim that no property or cash had been seized could not be independently established from the information available. Likewise, the assertion that investigators recovered only old BlackBerry phones and bank tokens was not independently verified.
Asset seizure is also not necessarily an automatic consequence of an investigation. Investigative agencies may require sufficient evidence and appropriate legal orders before freezing accounts, seizing assets or pursuing forfeiture proceedings.
The controversy therefore continues to centre on whether the investigations will ultimately result in formal charges, asset recovery or other legal action, with El-Rufai's supporters closely monitoring the proceedings.
Comments
Post a Comment