JamzNG Latest News, Gist, Entertainment in Nigeria
The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Commission (ICPC) has laid a four-count indictment against a consultant oncologist at the National Hospital, Abuja, Prof. Bello Abubakar, over allegations of falsifying a medical report allegedly used to support a bail application for former Kaduna State governor, Nasir El-Rufai.
The anti-corruption agency said the medical report, which said El-Rufai required urgent medical intervention, was deliberately fabricated to mislead the court dealing with one of the former governor’s corruption cases. Project reports
The charges, filed on Friday before a competent court, come amid ongoing investigations into multiple corruption allegations involving the former Kaduna governor.
The ICPC denounces a false medical report
According to the prosecution, Prof. Abubakar wrote a document titled “Medical Report and Expert Opinion for Urgent Medical Intervention” dated June 10, 2026, despite knowing that its contents were false.
The commission said the report was subsequently presented before a commissioner of oaths in Kaduna state and subsequently attached to a further affidavit filed in support of El-Rufai’s bail application in a case pending before the Kaduna state High Court.
The ICPC said the report was aimed at convincing the court to grant bail to the former governor on medical grounds.
Four charges preferred
The Anti-Corruption Commission accused the consultant of knowingly providing false information with the intent to deceive a public official, contrary to the provisions of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offenses Act, 2000.
The second allegation was that the doctor abused his position as a consultant at the National Hospital by issuing the medical report to gain an unfair advantage, an offense also punishable under the ICPC Act.
In the third charge, the commission accused Prof. Abubakar of conspiring with one Aliyu Bala to fabricate false information by preparing the report to enable the filing of an affidavit in support of El-Rufai’s bail application.
The fourth charge alleged that the consultant dishonestly produced a false document by issuing the report on the official letterhead of the National Hospital without the authorization of the hospital management, contrary to the provisions of the penal code.
The National Hospital denies the report
Court documents indicate that the Chief Medical Director (CMD) of the National Hospital, Prof. Raji Mahmud, is expected to testify that the medical report was never authorized by the hospital.
According to the prosecution, the hospital management became aware of the report only after receiving questions from ICPC investigators.
The CMD is expected to tell the court that the hospital authorities conducted an internal investigation after the commission sought document verification.
The investigation reportedly found no evidence that El-Rufai had undergone the medical examination described in the report.
The hospital management also reportedly said that the report had not gone through the procedures established by the institution before its issuance.
Hospital records allegedly contradict the report
The ICPC further said that officials at the National Hospital searched the institution’s electronic medical records using several variations of El-Rufai’s name, but found no record indicating that he was registered as a patient during the period covered by the medical report.
According to court documents, hospital officials also searched for oncology department records from the first two weeks of June 2026, but reportedly found no consultation records corresponding to the former governor.
The hospital also said the report lacked essential identifying details, including a hospital registration number, making it difficult to verify any consultation or treatment.
Investigators further stated that although the document bore the hospital’s official letterhead, it did not have the approval or knowledge of hospital management.
The doctor defends the relationship
In his statement to the investigators, Prof. Abubakar reportedly denied any wrongdoing.
He claimed that El-Rufai had been his patient at the National Hospital since 2005 and claimed that not all consultations were formally documented because some discussions did not require official medical records.
The consultant further said he assisted the former governor on several occasions between 2025 and 2026, including visits while El-Rufai was in ICPC custody and another visit to the National Hospital.
However, the prosecution argued that the doctor’s account conflicted with information provided by the hospital management.
According to the CMD, El-Rufai was only registered as a patient in the hospital in July 2026, contrary to the timeline presented by the consultant.
ICPC lists witnesses
The commission listed its lead investigator, Olugbemi Osanoto, and the chief medical director of the National Hospital among the key witnesses expected to testify during the trial.
Other witnesses include a representative of the Kaduna State High Court, as well as other witnesses who may be called during the proceedings.
The prosecution also intends to rely on documentary evidence, including statements obtained from the accused, official correspondence from the National Hospital, medical records, investigative reports and other exhibits collected during the investigation.
El-Rufai faces separate corruption cases
The charges against Prof. Abubakar are separate from the corruption cases currently pending against former governor El-Rufai.
The former governor is facing multiple prosecutions initiated by the ICPC over allegations bordering on abuse of office, procurement violations and alleged financial misconduct during his tenure in Kaduna State.
Among the cases is an alleged N8.68 billion closed-circuit television (CCTV) surveillance contract fraud, along with other charges before the Kaduna State High Court.
El-Rufai has consistently denied all charges, pleaded not guilty, and accused both the federal and Kaduna state governments of orchestrating politically motivated prosecutions against him.
The latest case against his personal doctor adds another dimension to the legal proceedings, with the court expected to determine whether the disputed medical report was actually released in accordance with professional and institutional procedures or deliberately fabricated to influence judicial proceedings.
