A Federal Capital Territory High Court sitting in Abuja has issued a warrant of arrest against former Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development, Sadiya Umar Farouq, and a former Permanent Secretary in the ministry, Bashir Nura Alkali, following their failure to appear in court for arraignment in an alleged multi-million naira fraud case.
The order was handed down on Thursday, April 16, 2026, by Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie after both defendants were absent when the matter was called. The third defendant in the case, Sani Nafiu Mohammed, was, however, present in court.
The defendants are being prosecuted by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on a 21-count charge bordering on criminal breach of trust, abuse of office, fraudulent award of contracts, and the alleged diversion of public funds amounting to approximately $1.3 million and N746.6 million.
Proceedings commenced with the formal reading of the charges, beginning with count one, which accuses the former minister and the ex-permanent secretary of criminal breach of trust involving public funds. According to the charge, the alleged offences took place between May 8, 2021, and September 22, 2022, within the jurisdiction of the court in Abuja.
The prosecution alleged that while in office, the defendants were entrusted with an aggregate sum of $1.3 million, which was meant to be refunded to the ministry by a contractor, Visual ICT Limited. The funds were reportedly excess payments made under the National Social Safety Net Coordinating Office (NASSCO) programme for the validation of beneficiaries of the Rapid Response Register.
However, the EFCC claims that the defendants fraudulently converted the funds for personal use instead of ensuring their return to the ministry, an act said to contravene Section 315 of the Penal Code.
Counsel to the EFCC, Rotimi Jacobs (SAN), told the court that previous efforts to arraign the defendants had been unsuccessful due to their failure to present themselves.
He explained that an earlier attempt to arraign them on December 15 had stalled because the defendants were not produced in court, despite assurances from their legal representatives that they would be made available.
According to the prosecution, the defendants were subsequently served with the charges following a court order authorising substituted service. However, only the third defendant responded to the summons after his surety was contacted, and both he and his surety were present in court.
The prosecution further informed the court that the first defendant, Farouq, had previously travelled abroad for medical treatment after her passport was released by the commission. However, she allegedly failed to return the passport or provide satisfactory medical documentation to justify her continued absence.
Jacobs told the court that no medical report had been submitted to the EFCC at the time the passport was released, and that documents later presented by her counsel were issued only after the charges had already been filed.
He also disclosed that an affidavit submitted by the defence that morning claimed the former minister had taken ill, but maintained that the supporting medical reports did not adequately account for her absence at the scheduled arraignment.
Counsel to the first defendant, Abdul Ibrahim (SAN), urged the court to admit the affidavit of facts explaining his client’s absence on health grounds. However, the court declined to accept the application.
The prosecution further sought leave of the court to amend an earlier ex-parte motion filed on February 16, 2026, and requested the issuance of a bench warrant against the first and second defendants due to their failure to appear in court despite being granted administrative bail.
Supporting the application, the EFCC presented an affidavit deposed to by an official, which stated that the defendants had been duly served with the charges and were aware of the court proceedings but failed to honour the summons.
Jacobs argued that it had become necessary for the court to compel the defendants’ attendance through a warrant of arrest, stressing that allowing them to remain at large would undermine the administration of justice.
“It is imperative for this honourable court to permit the Commission to arrest the first and second defendants so that they can be compelled to appear before the court,” he submitted.
In response, defence counsel appealed to the court for leniency, requesting a six-week extension within which to produce the first defendant. The request, however, did not persuade the court.
Delivering his ruling, Justice Onwuegbuzie granted the application by the prosecution and ordered the issuance of a bench warrant for the arrest of Farouq and Alkali.
The judge held that the defendants’ failure to appear, despite being served and granted bail, justified the issuance of the warrant to ensure their presence for arraignment.
The case was subsequently adjourned to May 18, 2026, for arraignment and the commencement of trial proceedings.
The development marks a significant escalation in the legal proceedings against the former public officials and underscores the EFCC’s continued efforts to pursue high-profile corruption cases involving alleged mismanagement of public funds.
Observers say the outcome of the case could have broader implications for accountability in public office, particularly in relation to the management of social intervention programmes and public procurement processes.
As the next hearing date approaches, attention is expected to focus on whether the defendants will comply with the court’s directive or be compelled to appear through enforcement of the arrest warrant.
