The Kwara State High Court yesterday adjourned till July 21, 2026, for the hearing of the motion on notice filed by lawyers to former Senate President, Dr Bukola Saraki, requesting Justice Osuolalale Ajayi to recuse himself to prevent prejudice and conflict of interest in the Offa robbery case.
The case was filed by the Kwara State Government against Saraki and his successor, Dr Abdulfatai Ahmed.
Meanwhile, Saraki has mandated his lawyers to immediately activate the appeal process in the case of criminalisation of free speech, which was filed by the Governor of Kwara State, Abdulrahman Abdulrazaq, and to ensure that they are fully filed before the adjourned date.
The Kwara State High Court sitting in Ilorin and presided by Justice MuritalaFolorunso had yesterday refused the prosecution’s request for a bench warrant against Saraki, but also rejected the argument by Saraki’s lawyer that the court lacked jurisdiction over the matter and should therefore decline to continue with the case.
Justice Folorunso then adjourned the matter to July 22.
However, the defence lawyers advised him to appeal the decision of the Ilorin High Court, insisting that jurisdiction is fundamental to the case and should be fully determined before it can proceed, adding that the issue of jurisdiction goes to the root of the matter.
In a motion on notice filed by the defence lawyers led by MrKamaldeenAjibade (SAN), the team reminded Justice Ajayi that he is also the presiding judge in the civil suit number KWS/492/2024 between Yusuf AishatIbikunle and two others V. Governor of Kwara State and others, arising from the same Offa robbery.
The defendant’s lawyers argued that while Saraki and Ahmed are first and second defendants in the present criminal proceedings, they are the third and fourth defendants in the civil matter. They added that the “principal issues for determination in the civil suit are substantially intertwined with the allegations, which are yet to be determined in the instant criminal charge.
According to a statement by his Press Officer on Local Matters, AbdulganiyuAbdulqadir, the former Senate President’s lawyers, in a 27-page process, reminded the judge that the civil case “is founded on substantially the same facts and allegations forming the subject matter of this criminal charge,” and that having commenced hearing on the earlier case, he would be prejudiced by the facts arising from the civil matter as he proceeds with the criiminal case.
The lawyers argued that “there exists a real likelihood, or at least a reasonable apprehension, that the prior consideration and determination of those facts in the civil suit may affect public confidence in the impartial adjudication of the instant criminal charge.”
In this article