“Appeal Court Did Not Rule On Status Quo Request” — Saraki Media Office Accuses Kwara Government Of Misrepresenting Proceedings

The Abubakar Bukola Saraki Media Office has accused the Kwara State Government of misrepresenting proceedings before the Court of Appeal in Ilorin concerning the ongoing Offa robbery case involving former Senate President Bukola Saraki, former Kwara State Governor Abdulfatah Ahmed and two former government aides.

The media office maintained that the appellate court did not hear or determine an application seeking an order directing the parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum, contrary to the impression it alleged was created by the state government’s account of the proceedings.

In a statement issued on Thursday, November 5, 2026, and signed by Abdulkadir Abdulganiyu, Personal Assistant on Local Matters to Saraki, the media office challenged reports that the Court of Appeal had rejected a request to halt proceedings in the criminal case.

It accused the Kwara State Government of hurriedly circulating information about the November 3 proceedings in an attempt to influence public opinion and prejudice the hearing scheduled before the Kwara State High Court.

According to the statement, the controversy arose from two separate appeals pending before the Court of Appeal, Ilorin Judicial Division, involving Yusuf Abdulwahab, a former Chief of Staff to Ahmed, and Alabi Olalekan, a former political aide to the former governor.

The appeals, marked CA/IL/4C/2026 and CA/IL/93C/2026, arose from the criminal proceedings connected with the April 5, 2018, Offa bank robbery.

The first appeal was instituted by Abdulwahab against the People of Kwara State, Saraki, Ahmed and Olalekan, while the second was filed by Olalekan against the People of Kwara State, Saraki, Ahmed and Abdulwahab.

The Saraki Media Office explained that during the hearing on Tuesday, November 3, lawyers representing the appellants made two requests before the appellate court, presided over by Justice Ridwan Maiwada Abdullahi.

The lawyers, J. A. Mumini, SAN, and A. T. Ahmed, sought an accelerated hearing of the appeals and an order directing the parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum pending their determination.

According to the media office, the appellate court granted the request for an accelerated hearing but did not entertain or rule on the separate application concerning the maintenance of the status quo.

It stated that Justice Abdullahi instead directed Mumini, who represented Abdulwahab, to file a formal application rather than rely on the oral request made during the proceedings.

The media office further maintained that the court directed the senior lawyer to file the necessary processes before November 12, 2026, when the appellate matter was adjourned.

It insisted that no arguments were heard and no ruling was delivered on the request for a status quo order.

The statement consequently challenged the account circulated by the Kwara State Government, which indicated that the appellate court had refused an application seeking to suspend the criminal proceedings.

The media office alleged that the government’s communication presented an incomplete and misleading account of what transpired in court.

“What the Kwara State Government is doing by quickly pushing out information that the request for a stay of execution was refused by the Court of Appeal is to prejudice the sitting of the High Court on the matter today,” the statement said.

The Saraki Media Office maintained that the distinction between an application being refused and a court declining to entertain an oral request pending the filing of formal processes was important to understanding the status of the appeals.

Its position, however, differs from earlier accounts of the November 3 proceedings, which indicated that the Court of Appeal rejected applications to stay the criminal trial while granting the appellants additional time to file their reply briefs.

According to those accounts, Mumini informed the appellate court that the appellants had received the respondents’ briefs on November 2 and requested an abridgment of time to file their replies within four days.

He also sought an order staying proceedings before the trial court pending the determination of the appeals.

Counsel for the Kwara State Government, Chief R. O. Balogun, SAN, did not oppose the request for additional time but objected to the application seeking to halt the criminal proceedings.

Balogun argued that a stay of proceedings was not permissible in the circumstances of the criminal case and maintained that the pending appeals should not prevent the trial court from proceeding with the charges.

He also contended that the application was intended to delay the progress of the case.

However, counsel for the second respondent, K. K. Eleja, SAN, supported the application, arguing that the Court of Appeal could invoke its powers under Section 15 of the Court of Appeal Act to preserve the subject matter of the appeals.

Eleja maintained that allowing the criminal proceedings to continue while the appeals remained pending could render the appeals nugatory.

The earlier accounts stated that the appellate court granted the request for abridgment of time but refused the application for a stay of proceedings.

The Saraki Media Office has now disputed that account, insisting that the request to maintain the status quo was not determined and that counsel was directed to bring a formal application.

The disagreement centres on the precise nature of the requests made before the appellate court and whether its pronouncement amounted to a refusal of a stay of proceedings or merely a direction to file a formal application concerning the preservation of the existing position.

The competing accounts have not been reconciled by an independently examined certified record of the November 3 proceedings.

The controversy comes as the Kwara State High Court continues proceedings in the fresh criminal case instituted by the state government against Saraki, Ahmed, Abdulwahab and Olalekan over allegations connected with the 2018 Offa robbery.

The state government filed a 20-count charge, marked KWS/114C/26, containing allegations including criminal conspiracy and culpable homicide.

The charges arose from the April 5, 2018, armed robbery in Offa, during which several banks and a police station were attacked, resulting in the deaths of several people, including police officers.

Saraki, Ahmed and the other defendants have denied wrongdoing, with the former Senate President maintaining that the prosecution is politically motivated.

The present criminal proceedings are separate from the earlier prosecution of the principal robbery suspects, who were convicted following the attack.

In October 2026, the Kwara State High Court rejected an application seeking the withdrawal of the judge presiding over the fresh criminal case and the reassignment of the matter.

The application had raised concerns about alleged bias arising from the judge’s previous involvement in related civil proceedings.

The court dismissed the application after finding that sufficient grounds had not been established to justify recusal.

The trial court subsequently adjourned the matter to November 5, 2026, for further proceedings.

It is against that background that the Saraki Media Office has questioned the timing and substance of the Kwara State Government’s communication concerning the appellate proceedings.

The media office maintained that the government’s account was capable of influencing perceptions of the pending applications and the proceedings before the trial court.

The Kwara State Government’s position, as reflected in earlier reports, is that the Court of Appeal declined to halt the criminal trial and that proceedings before the High Court could continue.

The Saraki Media Office, on the other hand, insists that the appellate court made no ruling on the request for an order maintaining the status quo ante bellum.

The competing positions leave the precise terms of the November 3 pronouncement in dispute.

A definitive determination of what the appellate court ordered would require examination of the official record or certified ruling.

Meanwhile, the substantive allegations against Saraki, Ahmed, Abdulwahab and Olalekan remain unresolved.

.. “Appeal Court Did Not Rule On Status Quo Request” — Saraki Media Office Accuses Kwara Government Of Misrepresenting Proceedings … NewsNGR.