Federal Director of Public Prosecutions Clears Bukola Saraki of Involvement in 2018 Offa Bank Robbery

Historical federal legal advice reveals no evidence linked Bukola Saraki to the 2018 Offa robbery, contradicting fresh charges from the Kwara State Government.

By: AXL Media

Published: Apr 20, 2026, 3:25 AM EDT

Source: Information for this report was sourced from Politics Nigeria

The Absence of a Criminal Nexus

Investigative details have surfaced confirming that the Federal Government previously absolved former Senate President Bukola Saraki of any involvement in the 2018 Offa bank robbery. The Director of Public Prosecutions of the Federation, E. U. Mohammed, reached this conclusion after reviewing a comprehensive 16 page report compiled by the Intelligence Response Team of the Nigeria Police. In his initial legal advice issued in June 2018, Mohammed stated that the evidence provided failed to establish a link between the suspects and the deadly criminal act that devastated the community.

Consistent Findings Across Multiple Reviews

The federal review process involved multiple stages of scrutiny following additional police investigations. After a secondary report was submitted in July 2018, the Director of Public Prosecutions issued a second legal opinion in August of that year. This subsequent document reaffirmed that there was no departure from earlier findings, emphasizing that the office could not establish a prima facie case for criminal conspiracy, armed robbery, or culpable homicide against Saraki. This consistent legal stance highlighted the lack of evidentiary support for the allegations at the federal level.

Recommendations for Primary Suspect Prosecution

Rather than pursuing charges against political figures, the federal legal advice recommended the prosecution of six individuals directly connected to the heist. While one of these suspects died during the period of police custody, the remaining individuals were brought before the High Court in Ilorin. During the judicial proceedings, several defendants alleged that they were subjected to pressure and offered financial incentives to implicate the former Senate President. Despite these claims of coerced testimony, the court proceeded to convict the primary defendants for their direct roles in the incident.