Kwara govt sues Saraki, ex-Senate president, over criminal defamation

Kwara State Government, on Wednesday, dragged Bukola Saraki, former Senate President and former Kwara State Governor, before the Kwara State High Court for alleged criminal defamation against Governor Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq.

In a charge sheet containing a one-count charge signed by Senior Ibrahim, the State attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Ayoola Idowu Akande, Director, Public Prosecution (DPP), and B.L. Abdulsalam, Assistant Chief State Counsel, Ministry of Justice, Saraki was accused of committing an illegal act for alleged publishing and sharing statement on or about 17th April, 2026 on social media and newspapers containing insulting, derogatory and abusive languages that the Governor of Kwara State, Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq is not educated up to secondary school education.

The charge sheet, while referring to the criminal defamation that was allegedly commited by Saraki against the State governor, read (the crime) “which you (Saraki) knew or ought to have known to be false, but you intentionally published the said statements in a manner to insult or provoke the Governor of Kwara State, His Excedency, Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq and the Kwara State Government, which you did in a manner likely to cause breakdown of public peace and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 399 of the Penal Code, CAP. P4, Laws of Kwara State, 2006”.

During the Court proceedings on Wednesday, RO Balogun, the prosecution counsel said that the matter was for arraignment, prayed court to issue bench warrant against Saraki to make him appear in court.

The counsel said that Court should discountenance adjournment motion, adding that since it is meant for arraignment. “The defendant’s counsel is in court appearing for him and he should be here. We’re the prosecution and we should be in charge. He’s been duly served. The case should commence. There is no reason proffered by his counsel for his absence. We pray court to issue bench warrant against the defendant in line with section 138”, he argued in Court.

In his counter argument, the Defendant’s Counsel, Jimoh Mumeen (SAN), challenged jurisdiction of Court, saying that the Federal High Court has jurisdiction and not the State High Court.

“The defendant brought the matter here for reason best known to them”, he said, adding that his client was not properly served, “We challenge the service”.

After a two-hour recess requested by the judge to rule on motion for preliminary objection and or adjournment between the counsels, the court ruled that the defendant is free to ask for adjournment.

Thus, the Court presided over by Justice M. O. Folorunso, adjourned the matter for preliminary objection and arraignment till July 3, 2026.