The ongoing detention of former Kaduna State Governor Nasir el‑Rufa’i has ignited a storm of public debate, political commentary, and legal controversy — but recent developments have raised more questions than answers about accountability and justice in Nigeria’s democratic landscape.
At the centre of the controversy is a claim that el‑Rufai’s family wants him released from custody because he allegedly suffered a common nosebleed while being detained. But what might seem like a minor health complaint to some has become a flashpoint in a wider national conversation about fairness, equal application of the law, and unresolved human rights violations.
Why Sympathy for a Nosebleed Isn’t Enough
I genuinely sympathise with anyone experiencing discomfort or health concerns in custody — including Nasir el‑Rufa’i’s alleged nosebleed. According to statements from his media aide, el‑Rufa’i suffered an overnight nosebleed while in the custody of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). There are also reports that his wife was prevented from delivering food to him directly on one occasion, despite visiting him.
However, it’s important to put this claim in perspective. A nosebleed is a common experience, particularly in Nigeria during the dry Harmattan season, when countless Nigerians suffer similar episodes due to dry air and environmental conditions. Millions experience nosebleeds without them becoming matters for national debate — or justification for special treatment. ;-)
Under these circumstances, sympathy for a nosebleed — while human — should not eclipse far more serious, unresolved issues linked to el‑Rufa’i’s tenure and ongoing investigations.
At Least He Has Access — But What About Others?
It’s also true that el‑Rufa’ is alive, has access to lawyers, is able to eat meals (even if indirectly handed over), and has medical support. His condition is being publicly discussed by his camp and monitored by observers — including a former Vice President calling for transparency.
This contrasts sharply with the fates of many other Nigerians who were detained, disappeared, or wrongfully imprisoned during el‑Rufa’i’s time in office — in some cases without accountability or closure.
That contrast raises fundamental questions about fairness and equal protection under the law.
So What About Dadiyata? The Unresolved Disappearance That Still Haunts Nigeria
One incident that refuses to fade into obscurity is the disappearance of Abubakar Idris, popularly known as Dadiyata.
On the morning of August 2, 2019, during el‑Rufa’i’s administration as governor of Kaduna State, armed security officials allegedly snatched Dadiyata from his driveway in the early hours — and he has not been heard from since.
His wife, Khadija Ahmad Lame, and their two young daughters, Hanifa and Fatima, have endured years of trauma, uncertainty, and unanswered questions. For nearly seven years, the family has lived in anguish, unable to confirm whether he is alive, dead, or being held somewhere.
The Department of State Services (DSS) has now reopened the Dadiyata case, and authorities have even seized el‑Rufa’i’s passport as part of the ongoing investigation into alleged links between him (and some of his sons) and the disappearance.
Despite the seriousness of this unresolved matter — involving alleged kidnapping and possible state‑linked complicity — public discussion has largely centred on the former governor’s well‑being in detention, rather than justice for the victim’s family.
El‑Rufa’i’s Public Admissions and the Call for Transparency
During an interview on Arise TV, el‑Rufa’i reportedly admitted to knowing at least one policeman involved in the matter. That interview — intended to explain his side of events — has instead raised even more questions:
Why did that policeman have intelligence related to Dadiyata?
How was that information obtained?
Why wasn’t the officer called forward for investigation?
If el‑Rufa’i truly knows someone connected to the incident, then many argue that officer should be in custody — not just the former governor himself.
A Nosebleed Isn’t a Medical Emergency — But Dadiyata’s Case Is
When discussions about el‑Rufai’s detention focus on a nosebleed, it belies the gravity of the allegations surrounding his time in office.
As public controversies unfolded, el‑Rufai also became embroiled in probes into his governance, including allegations of major financial impropriety. Anti‑graft agencies are investigating claims that he siphoned as much as ₦432 billion from Kaduna State coffers through questionable loans, contract awards, and alleged misuse of public funds.
Beyond financial allegations, he has been charged with other serious offences, including alleged illegal interception of a national security adviser’s phone calls — a claim that carries national security concerns.
By contrast, conditions like serious medical ailments that affected critics under his watch — such as hypertension, malaria, or injuries in custody — went without special concessions or leniency when his political opponents and journalists were detained.
Journalists, Critics and A History of Harsh Detentions
During el‑Rufa’i’s tenure as governor, several journalists and critics were detained and allegedly subjected to harsh conditions:
Luka Biniyat of Vanguard Newspaper reportedly suffered hypertension in detention.
Midat Joseph of Leadership Newspaper developed malaria while detained.
Others — including Jacob Dickson, Sunny Yayock, Stephen Kefas, and celebrity lawyer‑mogul Audu Maikori — were also detained, with some developing health issues as a result.
Despite these ailments, none of these individuals were publicly released on health grounds during their detentions. Contrast this with today’s focus on a so‑called “nosebleed” in custody — and one begins to see why many Nigerians are unpersuaded by the sympathy narrative.
Due Process vs. Accountability: What Nigerians Really Want
El‑Rufa’i’s lawyers have taken legal steps, including suing the ICPC and other agencies for alleged unlawful actions — such as an alleged illegal search of his Abuja home — and requesting bail.
Meanwhile, his allies in politics — including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar — have called for transparency regarding his detention and welfare while warning against selective prosecution and the appearance of using anti‑corruption efforts as political tools.
These developments underscore the complex intersections of human rights, legal due process, political accountability, and public perception. But at the heart of the matter remains a critical question:
👉 Is a common nosebleed worthy of the same national attention as a missing critic, unresolved for years?
Conclusion: Where Is Dadiyata — And Where Is the Real Conversation?
At the end of the day, Nasir el‑Rufa’i’s current situation — including reports of a nosebleed — should not be dismissed outright. Every person in custody deserves humane treatment, healthcare access, and respect for their rights.
But commiseration for a nosebleed cannot outweigh the legal and moral imperative to seek accountability for unresolved disappearances, potential abuses of office, and credible allegations of financial misconduct.
If Nigerians are urged to empathise with el‑Rufa’i, then they must also — without question — demand answers to: #WhereIsDadiyata? — a question that has gone unanswered for nearly seven years, leaving a family without closure and a country with a haunting reminder of unresolved injustice.
0 Comments