Atiku Scratching His Head As Supreme Court Tells Him To Prove Alleged Forgery Against Tinubu Beyond Reasonable Doubt

Atiku Scratching His Head As Supreme Court Tells Him To Prove Alleged Forgery Against Tinubu Beyond Reasonable Doubt

Justice John Okoro, the Chairman of the Supreme Court panel overseeing the appeals against the election of President Bola Tinubu, emphasized on Monday that Atiku Abubakar, the Peoples Democratic Party’s presidential candidate in the February election, must substantiate the accusation of certificate forgery against the former Lagos State governor beyond a reasonable doubt.

This caution came during the hearing of the election petition appeals filed by Atiku and Peter Obi of the Labour Party.

The directive followed the plea made by Atiku’s lead counsel, Chris Uche, SAN, urging the court to accept the new evidence presented by the petitioners.

Read Also Tenant Caught In Bed With Landlord’s Daughter (VIDEO)

In his attempt to challenge Tinubu’s victory and validate the claim that he was not eligible to run in the presidential poll, Atiku had sought an order from an Illinois Chicago district court to compel the Chicago State University to release the President’s academic records.

The former vice-president had accused Tinubu of falsifying the CSU diploma in Business Administration awarded in 1979, which he submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission.

Read Also Students Organise S3x Party Inside Hostel (VIDEO)

He requested a copy of any diploma issued by CSU in 1979, a copy of the diploma the CSU gave to Tinubu in 1979, and copies of diplomas similar to what CSU awarded to him in 1979, including those with the same font, seal, signatures, and wording.

Atiku’s application faced opposition from Tinubu’s legal team, who raised privacy concerns while conceding that only the certificate should be released and not other confidential records.

However, the United States court mandated the disclosure of the former Lagos State governor’s academic records, which Atiku submitted in support of his election petition appeal at the Supreme Court.

While addressing the apex court on Monday, Uche maintained that the matter concerning Tinubu’s academic records held significant importance and urged the Supreme Court to consider it as new evidence.

The senior lawyer said, “The issue involving Tinubu’s certificate is a weighty, grave, and constitutional one, which the Supreme Court should admit. I urge the court to admit the fresh evidence of President Tinubu’s academic records from CSU presented by Atiku.

“The court should take a look at Tinubu’s records and reach a decision devoid of technicality. As a policy court, the court has a duty to look at it and should side-step technicalities. ”

Atiku’s chief counsel further argued that the time limit of 180 days should not unduly restrict the court.

However, Justice Okoro, characterizing the matter as of a criminal nature, asserted that it must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

He noted the presence of two conflicting letters from Chicago State University. According to him, one of the letters verified the President’s certificate, while the other undermined its authenticity.

He said, “This is a criminal matter that has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. There are two conflicting letters from the CSU: one authenticating the president’s certificate and another discrediting it.”

“I expected the college to write disclaiming the documents in dispute. Does a stenographer have the legal authority to administer oaths? We are dealing with a matter that touches on national interest,’’ he noted.

However, Uche contended that the depositions were conducted in the presence of Tinubu’s US lawyers, emphasizing that there was no dispute about it.

Akin Olujinmi, SAN, the counsel for the All Progressives Congress, advised the court that Atiku should not be permitted to introduce documents that were not presented at the tribunal.

He said, “You cannot smuggle in a document into the Supreme Court without first tendering the same at the trial court. The appeal is misconceived and lacks merit. It should be outright dismissed. ”

“The depositions are not admissible in the USA. It is akin to deposition which we have in Nigeria. The deposition was not done in court and INEC was not a party to it. The deposition must be adopted by the individual that deposed to it before it can be admitted as evidence before the court,“ he reasoned.

He further asserted that the 180-day timeframe designated for the conclusion of election petition cases is as unyielding as a rock of Gibraltar; it cannot be altered.

INEC’s legal representative, Abubakar Mahmoud, urged the court to interpret Section 285 of the constitution and also advised the court to reject the appeal.

The panel, consisting of Uwani Aji, Mohammed Garba, Ibrahim Saulawa, Adamu Jauro, and Abubakar Tijjani, along with Justice Okoro, reserved judgment on the matter.

Never Miss Any News, Join Our WhatsApp Group With This Link Below

https://chat.whatsapp.com/L6TlxYS6ozI2UuJYsfqmeS