El-Rufai, the Airport Drama, and the Rule of Law: When Power Changes Hands in Nigeria
Nigeria’s political landscape is once again charged with controversy following claims by former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir El-Rufai, that there was an illegal attempt to arrest him at the Abuja airport upon his arrival from Cairo. According to a statement reportedly issued by his legal team, the alleged move was described as executive overreach and a deliberate disregard for the rule of law.
The claim immediately ignited heated reactions across social media and political circles. However, what followed was not an outpouring of universal sympathy. Instead, it triggered a wave of counter-accusations, public reminders, and sharp commentary referencing El-Rufai’s own tenure in office.
One particularly striking response came from Steve Kefas, who publicly accused the former governor of hypocrisy. Kefas alleged that on May 8, 2019, he was abducted from Port Harcourt without a warrant, implying that the same disregard for due process now being decried was allegedly practiced during El-Rufai’s administration. His response was blunt: perhaps the difference now, he suggested, is that he was “just an ordinary citizen” and not a former governor.
This exchange captures a deeper and more troubling issue within Nigeria’s democracy: the cyclical nature of power, the fragility of institutional safeguards, and the selective invocation of the rule of law.
The Alleged Arrest Attempt at Abuja Airport
The allegation that security operatives attempted to arrest El-Rufai at Abuja airport raises serious constitutional questions. Under Nigeria’s legal framework, arrest procedures must comply with due process requirements as outlined in the 1999 Constitution (as amended), particularly provisions safeguarding personal liberty.
Section 35 of the Constitution guarantees that no citizen shall be deprived of personal liberty except in accordance with a procedure permitted by law. Arrests without warrants, except in specific legally defined circumstances, may amount to violations of constitutional rights.
El-Rufai’s lawyers have framed the alleged incident as a troubling example of executive overreach—an abuse of state power designed to intimidate political opponents. In a country where accusations of politically motivated arrests are not uncommon, the claim naturally attracted attention.
But the public response reveals that this is not merely about one airport incident. It is about memory.
Southern Kaduna, Security Operations, and Lingering Accusations
During El-Rufai’s tenure as Governor of Kaduna State from 2015 to 2023, the state faced significant security challenges, particularly in Southern Kaduna. The region experienced violent clashes often characterized as ethno-religious conflicts involving farming communities and armed groups.
Human rights organizations, civil society actors, and religious leaders repeatedly criticized the state government’s handling of the crisis. Groups such as Amnesty International documented killings and displacement in the region, calling for accountability and stronger protection of civilians.
El-Rufai consistently defended his administration’s actions, arguing that the violence was rooted in longstanding communal disputes exacerbated by banditry and criminality. However, critics accused his government of failing to adequately protect predominantly Christian communities in Southern Kaduna.
Additionally, there were allegations concerning the handling of Shi’a Muslim protests in Kaduna, particularly involving the Islamic Movement in Nigeria. Clashes between security forces and members of the movement resulted in casualties over the years, drawing further scrutiny from local and international observers.
While no court has conclusively found El-Rufai criminally responsible for these incidents, public perception remains deeply divided. For many critics, his present complaints about executive overreach sound hollow against this backdrop.
Allegations of Financial Misconduct
Another recurring accusation in public commentary relates to alleged diversion of funds during his time as governor. Kaduna State undertook significant infrastructure projects under El-Rufai’s administration, funded partly through domestic and international loans.
The former governor positioned himself as a reformer who reduced government size, cut waste, and pursued aggressive urban renewal policies. However, like many public office holders in Nigeria, his administration was not immune to allegations of financial irregularities.
It is important to note that allegations are not convictions. Nigeria’s anti-corruption institutions, including the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, are constitutionally empowered to investigate financial crimes. As of this writing, no final judicial pronouncement has established guilt regarding these accusations.
Nonetheless, the mere existence of such allegations contributes to public skepticism whenever claims of political persecution arise.
Public Reactions: Sympathy Fatigue and Political Memory
The online responses to El-Rufai’s statement reflect what can be described as sympathy fatigue. Many Nigerians argue that political actors often champion the rule of law only after leaving office.
One widely shared reaction summarized the sentiment succinctly: when you held power, you wielded it without restraint; now that you are on the outside, you appeal to constitutional protections.
This view echoes a broader frustration within Nigerian society. Citizens frequently observe that institutions appear strong against ordinary individuals but weak against powerful figures—until those figures lose influence.
The criticism also extends to El-Rufai’s political alliances. He has long been associated with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, a central figure in Nigeria’s current political establishment. Some commentators argue that any dispute between them should be resolved internally rather than presented as public drama.
The Nature of Power in Nigeria’s Political System
Nigeria operates a presidential system modeled after that of the United States, with significant executive authority vested in the presidency and state governors. Historically, this concentration of power has sometimes enabled actions perceived as heavy-handed or politically motivated.
Executive overreach is not unique to any one administration. From military rule to civilian governance, the tension between state authority and civil liberties has been a recurring theme.
The key issue is consistency. The rule of law cannot function as a selective instrument—invoked when convenient and ignored when inconvenient. It must be a constant principle, applicable to both former governors and ordinary citizens.
As one commentator observed, power is temporary. Offices change hands. Political fortunes shift. What remains—or should remain—is institutional integrity.
Due Process vs. Political Theater
Another thread in the public reaction questions whether the alleged arrest attempt was genuine or staged to generate sympathy. In Nigeria’s politically charged environment, accusations of theatrics are common.
However, such claims should be treated cautiously. Without verified evidence from credible investigative bodies, labeling the incident as staged remains speculative.
If there was indeed an unlawful attempt to arrest a former governor, that raises serious concerns about abuse of state power. Conversely, if the claim is exaggerated or misrepresented, that too would erode public trust.
The government, therefore, bears responsibility for transparent communication. Investigating and clarifying the facts would help prevent misinformation and restore confidence.
You Are Not Above the Law
One point unites both supporters and critics: no individual is above the law. Nigeria’s constitutional democracy rests on the principle of equality before the law.
If there are credible allegations of wrongdoing—whether involving security decisions, financial management, or any other matter—due process must take its course. Investigations should be conducted lawfully, transparently, and without political vendetta.
At the same time, law enforcement actions must adhere strictly to legal standards. Arrests, if warranted, should follow proper procedures. The rule of law protects not only the innocent but also the accused.
The Bigger Picture: Institutional Reform
The controversy surrounding El-Rufai is symptomatic of a deeper structural issue: Nigeria’s institutions often appear personalized rather than institutionalized.
Strong democracies rely on systems that function independently of personalities. When institutions are perceived as tools of whoever holds power, public trust erodes.
To move forward, Nigeria must strengthen judicial independence, enhance transparency in security operations, and ensure that anti-corruption investigations are insulated from political interference.
Conclusion: A Lesson in Political Accountability
The alleged airport incident involving Nasir El-Rufai has reopened old wounds and revived longstanding grievances. It has also reignited a national conversation about executive overreach, accountability, and the cyclical nature of power.
Whether this episode proves to be a genuine case of attempted unlawful arrest or political miscalculation, it underscores a fundamental truth: the rule of law must be consistent.
It cannot be a shield when convenient and a sword when powerful. It must apply equally—to former governors, sitting presidents, activists, journalists, and ordinary citizens alike.
In Nigeria’s evolving democracy, today’s office holder may be tomorrow’s private citizen. The protections we defend—or disregard—today may be the same protections we depend on tomorrow.
And that is the enduring test of any republic.
0 Comments