Snapshot

 The investigation and arraignment of politicians on corruption charges after every electoral cycle has become a familiar ritual in Nigeria’s political theatre. Successive administrations prosecute, often selectively, those who have fallen out of favour. Rarely are these exercises animated by a genuine commitment to institutional accountability. Instead, the public has come to interpret them as little more than internecine struggles within the political elite, what many Nigerians bluntly describe as “elite wars.”

The latest dramatis persona in this unfolding drama is Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, and his trajectory within it is particularly instructive.

To understand the current moment, one must return to the period preceding the 2023 elections. At the Kaduna Investment Summit, then-presidential candidate Bola Ahmed Tinubu publicly urged El-Rufai not to leave the country after the election to pursue a PhD abroad. Tinubu made clear his desire to continue working with him, an indication of the strategic value he placed on the former Kaduna governor within his political orbit.

That signal was not misplaced. As the storm of succession gathered before the APC presidential primaries, El-Rufai played a decisive role in galvanizing northern APC governors around the principle of zoning the presidential ticket to the South. In doing so, he helped consolidate the elite consensus around a southern candidacy and, inadvertently but decisively, around Tinubu’s ambition. It was a pivotal moment in the coalition-building that ultimately facilitated Tinubu’s ascent to power.

Against that backdrop, it was hardly surprising when El-Rufai’s name appeared on the list of ministerial nominees during the formation of the new administration’s cabinet. What came as a shock, however, was his subsequent denial of clearance by the Senate after screening, ostensibly on the basis of a security report. The opacity surrounding that report raised eyebrows across the political spectrum, particularly given the Senate’s willingness to clear other controversial nominees such as Nyesom Wike and Bello Matawalle.

The high-wire political maneuvering that culminated in his failed confirmation marked the beginning of El-Rufai’s gradual estrangement from the Tinubu administration. Since then, his political journey has been characterized by shifting alliances, from the APC to the SDP and subsequently to the ADC, alongside increasingly sharp critiques of the government of the day.

Some of those critiques have been incendiary. Others have proved uncomfortably prescient. Notably, El-Rufai’s claim that bandits were being paid substantial ransoms in exchange for abductees, initially dismissed by some as political provocation, was later echoed in an investigative report by Agence France-Presse (AFP) suggesting that the federal government had indeed paid millions of dollars to violent non-state actors. If accurate, such revelations raise troubling questions about the integrity of Nigeria’s non-kinetic security strategy.

For the opposition, statements of this nature represent valuable political ammunition, opportunities to interrogate government policy, and hold the administration accountable. Yet Nigeria’s opposition ecosystem, dominated by an uninspiring political old-guard, continues to suffer from a chronic deficit of strategy and coordination. Despite persistent governance failures that could serve as fertile ground for mobilization, the opposition has struggled to convert public frustration into structured political momentum.

Their inability to galvanize popular sentiment or articulate a coherent alternative vision has left much to be desired. As a result, even the most potent criticisms of government policy often dissipate without producing meaningful political pressure.

Within this landscape, El-Rufai has served as something of an amplifier for opposition politics. At moments when opposition voices fade from the national conversation, a well-timed interview, statement, or intervention from him tends to jolt the discourse back to life. Few contemporary Nigerian politicians possess his combination of media instinct, policy literacy, and appetite for confrontation.

In recent months, El-Rufai appeared to embrace the role of political provocateur with increasing deliberateness. From Egypt, he granted a series of fiery interviews sharply criticizing the administration, interventions that seemed almost calibrated to provoke a response from the state. Upon his return to Nigeria, reports emerged of an attempted effort by the DSS to detain him. Undeterred, he followed up with further appearances on platforms such as the BBC and ARISE Television, intensifying his critique of the government.

Today, he finds himself incarcerated.

Yet, strikingly, the opposition’s response has been tepid, consistent with the broader pattern of strategic lethargy that has defined its recent conduct. On 26 February 2026, a coalition of opposition actors convened a press conference to reject provisions of the Electoral Act. The gathering represented an ideal opportunity to highlight El-Rufai’s detention and frame it as a violation of constitutional liberties. Instead, the issue was conspicuously absent from their communiqué.

This silence carries consequences.

In practical terms, the opposition has lost one of its most effective strategists and mobilizers at a politically sensitive moment. With party primaries approaching, El-Rufai’s absence will likely complicate efforts within the ADC to manage post-primary reconciliation and forge consensus among competing factions, tasks for which his political dexterity would have been particularly valuable.

More broadly, his detention has unfolded through a sequence that raises troubling questions about due process. After honouring an invitation from the EFCC, he was detained and subsequently transferred to the ICPC, before being moved again to DSS custody. Despite these multiple detentions, he has yet to be produced consistently before the Federal High Court to answer the allegations against him, an arrangement that strains the constitutional guarantee of a fair hearing.

This revolving door of custody between anti-graft and security agencies bears the hallmarks of what legal scholars increasingly describe as lawfare, the strategic use of legal and institutional instruments to achieve political objectives.

The ostensible trigger for the case remains El-Rufai’s claim that the National Security Adviser’s phone had been wiretapped. While such an allegation is serious and deserving of scrutiny, it hardly justifies indefinite detention or the erosion of procedural safeguards.

Ironically, one of El-Rufai’s own most memorable political aphorisms now hangs over the situation: “Unless betrayed, our loyalty to friends and family is permanent and pensionable.”

The obvious question today is whether those loyalties are being tested, or quietly abandoned.

His protégés and allies are scattered across multiple layers of government, yet Nigerian politics is notorious for its thin loyalties and short institutional memory. The Kashim Ibrahim Fellows Alumni have issued a statement calling for his release, but statements alone rarely shift political outcomes. A coordinated press conference, sustained media engagement, and legal advocacy could have generated far greater pressure.

If anything, El-Rufai’s predicament offers the opposition an opportunity to recalibrate its strategy. Rather than allowing the episode to fade into the background noise of Nigerian politics, it could serve as a rallying point around broader themes of constitutionalism, civil liberties, and the weaponization of state institutions.

For an opposition struggling to remain politically relevant, this is precisely the kind of issue that can galvanize public attention, if handled with discipline and strategic intent.

As the electoral calendar inches forward, the lesson is straightforward. In the absence of organized resistance, the space for dissent will continue to narrow. Opposition figures will increasingly find themselves isolated when confronted by the coercive instruments of the state.

If the opposition coalition hopes to project itself as a credible alternative to the current administration, it must move beyond routine statements and symbolic gestures. Securing El-Rufai’s release from detention, or at minimum ensuring that his case proceeds transparently and lawfully, should become a coordinated political priority. Not merely for the sake of one man, but for the credibility of opposition politics itself.

Because in the unforgiving arithmetic of power, silence is rarely neutral. It is almost always interpreted as acquiescence.