A FEDERAL Capital Territory High Court sitting in Abuja on Thursday, April 16, 2026, issued a decisive warrant of arrest against former Minister of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development, Sadiya Umar Farouq, and former Permanent Secretary in the Ministry, Bashir Nura Alkali, over their repeated failure to appear in court for arraignment in an alleged high-profile financial misconduct case.
News Point Nigeria reports that the ruling, delivered by Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie, followed an application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which accused the defendants of deliberately evading arraignment despite being duly served with charges and court notices.
The case, which has drawn national attention due to the prominence of the accused person, also involves a third defendant, Sani Nafiu Mohammed, who was present in court on the scheduled hearing date.
According to court records, the trio were billed for arraignment on a 21-count charge bordering on criminal breach of trust, abuse of office, fraudulent contract awards, and alleged conversion of public funds running into approximately $1.3 million and ₦746,574,303 during their tenure in office.
The EFCC told the court that the alleged offences occurred between May 8, 2021, and September 22, 2022, in Abuja, while the defendants held key positions in the Ministry of Humanitarian Affairs, Disaster Management and Social Development.
One of the counts presented before the court alleged that Sadiya Umar Farouq and Bashir Nura Alkali dishonestly converted public funds entrusted to them, funds which were reportedly meant for the National Social Safety Net Coordinating Office (NASSCO) and linked to excess payments involving Visual ICT Limited.
The prosecution further argued that the defendants’ actions constituted criminal breach of trust under relevant provisions of the Penal Code and warranted full judicial scrutiny.
Lead prosecution counsel, Senior Advocate of Nigeria Rotimi Jacobs, informed the court that although the charge had been filed since December 15, 2025, repeated attempts to bring the defendants before the court had been unsuccessful.
He explained that earlier efforts to secure their appearance were stalled despite assurances from their legal representatives that they would produce them in court.
Jacobs further told the court that only the third defendant had been reached through his surety and had subsequently appeared before the EFCC, alongside his surety.
The prosecution also raised concerns over the first defendant’s travel history, alleging that she had previously been granted permission to travel to Saudi Arabia in 2024 for medical reasons, but had failed to return her passport to authorities thereafter.
He argued that no credible medical documentation had been provided prior to the approval of her travel, adding that the reports later submitted were generated after the filing of charges.
In response, counsel to the first defendant, Senior Advocate of Nigeria Abdul Ibrahim, informed the court that his client’s absence was due to ill health, urging the court to accept an affidavit of facts in support of her condition.
However, the court declined to admit the application, signaling its insistence on procedural compliance and physical appearance of the defendants.
The EFCC also sought to amend an earlier ex-parte motion filed on February 16, 2026, restricting its application to the first and second defendants and urging the court to compel their attendance.
The prosecution maintained that granting a bench warrant was necessary, stressing that the defendants had already been granted bail but failed to fulfill their obligation to appear before the court.
According to Jacobs, an affidavit deposed by one Celeb Peter on April 15, 2026, further confirmed that the defendants had been served and were fully aware of the proceedings but remained absent without lawful justification.
He urged the court to act decisively, arguing that the integrity of the judicial process was at stake if the defendants continued to disregard court summons.
On the other hand, the defence counsel appealed for additional time, requesting a six-week window within which he assured the court he would produce the first defendant.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Onwuegbuzie ruled in favour of the prosecution, issuing a bench warrant for the arrest of the first and second defendants.
The court held that their continued absence amounted to obstruction of justice and could not be condoned in a matter of such grave public interest and financial implication.
Consequently, the matter was adjourned till May 18, 2026, for arraignment and commencement of trial, marking a significant escalation in one of the most closely watched corruption cases involving former top federal officials in recent times.