In a detailed press statement issued by its Deputy Director-General and former Attorney General in Benue State, Dr. Alex Ter Adum, the group insisted that the former governor neither intercepted any telephone communication nor participated in any act that could amount to a cybercrime under Nigerian law.
El-Rufai, who is also identified as a chieftain of the African Democratic Congress, is reportedly being investigated over remarks he made concerning an alleged intercepted conversation involving the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu.
According to the statement, the allegations stem from El-Rufai’s public claim that an unnamed individual played for him a purportedly intercepted phone conversation allegedly linked to the National Security Adviser.
However, The Narrative Force stressed that this does not constitute a criminal offence.
“Mallam El-Rufai did not intercept any telephone communication. He did not authorize, direct, procure, finance, facilitate, or participate in any interception,” the statement read.
The group further emphasized that under Nigeria’s cybercrime and communications laws, interception is a strictly technical offence that requires proof of deliberate and unlawful access to communication systems.
“Mere presence when another person plays an alleged conversation, without prior knowledge, agreement, or technical involvement, does not amount to interception in law. Presence is not participation; exposure is not conspiracy,” Adum stated.
The advocacy group also noted that no technical investigation results have been publicly disclosed to establish whether any interception actually occurred.
It listed several unanswered questions, including whether the NSA’s phone was compromised, the method allegedly used, the identity of any interceptor, and any link between El-Rufai and the purported act.
“Criminal charges cannot precede proof of a crime. The burden of proof rests squarely on the State. Allegations no matter how dramatic are not evidence,” the statement added.
The group urged authorities to conduct a transparent and technically verifiable investigation before initiating prosecution.
Warning Against “Weaponization” of Criminal Law
The Narrative Force also cautioned against using criminal law to settle political disputes, warning that such actions could undermine democratic norms.
“We caution against the weaponization of criminal law to settle political irritation. Due process, not impulse, must guide state action,” Adum said.
The statement further argued that El-Rufai’s comments were intended as broader criticism of information leaks within government circles rather than an admission of wrongdoing.
“His remarks were illustrative of a wider concern that careless communication within official circles undermines operational secrecy.
That commentary cannot be distorted into participation in a crime,” the group noted.
DSS Charges Described as “Legally Unsustainable”
The group also referenced reports that the Department of State Services was behind the charges, describing the legal reasoning as flawed and dangerous.
According to Dr. Adum, the case appears to rely on the assumption that spoken words alone can be equated with completed criminal acts.
“That reasoning rests on a dangerous elasticity of inference that words, by mere utterance, can be transmuted into completed criminal acts. That position is neither novel nor sustainable,” he said.
The statement drew parallels with a past constitutional ruling by the Supreme Court of Nigeria involving political defections in Rivers State, where the court held that mere declarations do not constitute legally completed acts.
“Political rhetoric is not a juridical fact. The law demands overt, verifiable acts not speculation, not inference, not political hostility dressed up as evidence,” Dr. Adum explained.
Applying the same logic to El-Rufai’s case, the group maintained that a public comment about alleged interception cannot amount to proof of interception.
“To equate a public comment with the commission of a security offence is to collapse the distinction between speech and action a distinction fundamental to constitutional democracy,” the statement read.
The Narrative Force concluded by expressing confidence that no credible case can be sustained against the former governor.
“An alleged statement about telephone interception, even if controversial, is neither technical evidence nor forensic confirmation of any breach. Criminal liability cannot be constructed on conjecture,” Adum said.
He added:
“If mere assertion becomes equivalent to execution, then political discourse itself becomes prosecutable. Speech is not the deed and in this case, no crime exists in law or in fact.
