Kwara Court Set for Bukola Saraki's Criminal Defamation Hearing

Saraki, Kwara and the Offa Robbery Row That Refuses to Die

What began as another war of words in Kwara has now escalated into a full-blown courtroom battle with political and legal stakes that reach far beyond one man’s reputation. Bukola Saraki’s clash with the state government has dragged the Offa robbery shadow, allegations of defamation and a fierce jurisdictional fight into open view, setting the…

Atlantic Post

June 17, 2026

4–6 minutes

AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq, Breaking News, Bukola Saraki, criminal defamation, Kwara High Court, Kwara State Government, Offa robbery case

The legal and political storm around former Senate President Bukola Saraki has returned to the Kwara State High Court with fresh force, after the court fixed 3 July 2026 for the hearing of a preliminary objection and the possible arraignment of the ex-Senate President in a criminal defamation matter brought by the Kwara State Government.

The case, which centres on allegations that Saraki made damaging remarks against Governor AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq, is no longer merely about words exchanged in public. It has become a high-stakes test of political power, judicial process and the continuing contest over the Offa robbery narrative in Kwara.

What makes the matter more combustible is the charge itself. According to court reporting and the charge sheet summary, the state alleges that Saraki published a statement on or about 17 April 2026 across social media and newspapers, claiming that AbdulRazaq lacked the required secondary school qualification.

The government says the publication was false, insulting and abusive, and capable of provoking disorder. The prosecution has anchored its case on Section 399 of the Kwara State Penal Code, which criminalises insulting or abusive language likely to provoke a breach of the peace.

That point is important, because the public debate has been broadly described as “criminal defamation”, while the statutory hook cited in court reporting is specifically the public peace provision under Section 399.

At Wednesday’s hearing, the prosecution pushed hard. Counsel R.O. Balogun asked the court to issue a bench warrant, insisting Saraki had failed to appear despite being aware of the proceedings. His line was blunt: “The defendant’s counsel is in court appearing for him and he should be here.”

He also told the court, “We therefore pray the court to issue a bench warrant against him in line with Section 138.” The prosecution’s position was that the former Senate President had been duly served, and that the case should proceed without further delay.

Saraki’s legal team answered by attacking the foundation of the case rather than the substance of the accusation. His lawyer, Jimoh Mumini (SAN), argued that the Kwara State High Court lacked jurisdiction and that the matter ought to have been filed at the Federal High Court.

The defence also challenged service of the charge, saying Saraki had not been properly served with the court papers. After a two-hour recess, Justice M.O. Folorunso declined the prosecution’s push for an immediate arrest warrant and held that the defendant was entitled to seek an adjournment. The court then fixed 3 July 2026 for the preliminary objection and possible arraignment.

The political charge in the case is impossible to ignore. Saraki’s camp has repeatedly portrayed the Offa robbery-related moves as a political weapon rather than a genuine pursuit of justice.

In an earlier statement, Saraki described the renewed move against him as “a desperate ploy by a drowning politician” and called it “dirty politics taken too far and too low.”

He also insisted that he had “nothing to do directly or indirectly with any case of armed robbery or any criminal matter, whatsoever.”

Those words now sit at the heart of the broader dispute, because the new defamation case is tied to the same political wounds and the same accusations that have festered for years.

Saraki’s defence also leans heavily on the legal advice said to have been issued in the aftermath of the 2018 Offa attack. His side has repeatedly argued that the Director of Public Prosecution in the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation found no evidence linking him to the robbery.

Reporting on the matter shows Saraki saying the DPP was unable to establish “a nexus between the alleged offence and the suspects”, and that no prima facie case was made out against him. That historical point is crucial, because it is the same line of defence now being used to frame the present dispute as a political recycling of a settled matter.

The Kwara government, however, has taken a sharply different view. In the state’s telling, Saraki’s comments were not a mere political rebuttal but a calculated falsehood aimed at damaging the governor’s reputation and inflaming the public.

The state’s lawyers say the publication was made on multiple platforms, including Facebook, X and newspapers, and that it was deliberately phrased in abusive language to provoke both the governor and the government. That is why the state has chosen a criminal route rather than a civil one, turning a political quarrel into a courtroom confrontation with potential penal consequences.

Viewed more broadly, the case is a reminder that Kwara politics still revolves around the long shadow of the Offa robbery tragedy and the rival camps it hardened. The original robbery, which left dozens dead according to earlier reporting, became not only a criminal case but a political symbol, and the latest filings suggest that the symbol remains useful to both sides.

Saraki’s allies say the government is pursuing a media trial and punishing criticism; the government implies that the former Senate President has crossed the line from political speech into defamatory conduct. The July 3 hearing will therefore matter far beyond the courtroom, because it will determine whether this becomes a narrow legal dispute or a deeper political reckoning.

For now, the strategic question is not just whether Saraki will be arraigned, but whether the court will first settle the jurisdictional fight. If the defence succeeds, the prosecution’s timetable could slow considerably. If it fails, the case may move quickly into open criminal proceedings, with all the publicity and political bruising that would follow. Either way, this is now one of the most closely watched legal and political cases in Kwara, because it touches reputation, party rivalry, state power and the continuing battle over who gets to define the Offa robbery story.