Real Reason US Judge Halted Release Of Tinubu’s Chicago University Academic Record To Atiku

Real Reason US Judge Halted Release Of Tinubu’s Chicago University Academic Record To Atiku

The pivotal question before U.S. District Judge Nancy Maldonado revolves around former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s request for access to President Bola Tinubu’s academic records from Chicago State University in the United States. Atiku asserts that these records are crucial for his election petition case in Nigeria.

Atiku communicated to Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Gilbert that he required these records for submission to the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Nigeria. On the basis of this assertion, the magistrate instructed the university Tinubu attended (and from which he presented his certificate to INEC) to provide the records to Atiku by Thursday.

According to the university’s regulations, such information cannot be disclosed to a third party if the owner of the record objects to its release. The exception is when the court specifically orders the university to do so.

Tinubu raised objections, but the court, relying on Atiku’s assertion that the records are pertinent to his case in Nigeria, directed the university to comply with the request.

Read Also Prominent Judge Haruna Tsammani Asked Nigerians To Forgive President Tinubu For Controversial Drug Case? – Fact Emerge

Subsequently, on Thursday, Tinubu’s lawyer Christopher Carmichael approached a higher court and refuted Atiku’s claim. Carmichael, in an emergency motion filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division, requested the court to delay the effect of the magistrate’s order until at least Monday, September 25, 2023. He argued that this delay would allow the court to thoroughly consider the extent of the magistrate’s authority to issue the order without review and whether it was a correct application of the law to the presented facts.

According to Tinubu, “Applicant (Atiku) is challenging an election that occurred in Nigeria in February 2023. Applicant filed his action under 28 U.S.C. § 1782 on August 2, 2023, after dismissing a similar Illinois State court action that was originally filed July 11, 2023.

“The limited time available is therefore due to the applicant’s decision to seek information utilising section 1782 six months after the election concluded. This court referred the applicant’s request to issue discovery to the magistrate. (Dkts. 6 & 7.)”

Carmichael said he was unaware until the issuance of the ruling directing CSU to release his records to Atiku that the magistrate intended to issue a binding ruling requiring compliance without any action by the court.

He added: “Considering the nature of applications for discovery under 28 U.S.C. § 1782, the Ninth Circuit concluded a magistrate may only report and recommend to a district judge, in CPC Patent Technologies PTY Ltd. v. Apple, Inc., the Ninth Circuit held.”

The attorney informed the court that Atiku’s assertion regarding the critical importance of the records to the Nigerian case was false.

He contended that Judge Jeffrey Gilbert violated the constitution by assuming the role of a final authority in matters of discovery.

He urged the higher court to issue an immediate order deferring the implementation of the Magistrate’s ruling, at least until Monday, September 25, 2023, to allow for a thorough examination of the extent of the Magistrate’s authority to issue such an order without review and to consider whether it was a correct application of the law to the presented facts.

Furthermore, he implored the court to halt the order, as the records were not included in Atiku’s statement of claims filed at the Supreme Court. These records were not raised during the proceedings at the PEPC, and therefore cannot be introduced at the Supreme Court, as it would constitute a new and untimely assertion.

Tinubu’s lawyer contended that Atiku deceived the lower judge into believing that he could utilize the records in the Supreme Court proceedings.

In response to Tinubu’s lawyer’s argument, the appellate judge issued a stay on the lower court’s order and requested the President’s counsel to submit any additional details on the matter, if applicable.

Tinubu’s lawyer is slated to file his brief on Monday, while Atiku has until 11:59 pm on Wednesday to raise objections.

Following this, Tinubu’s lawyer will file a reply, which must be submitted to the court no later than 11:59 pm on Thursday.

Subsequently, a new judgment will be delivered.

On Tuesday, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate submitted 35 grounds of appeal before the Supreme Court, in light of the PEPC’s dismissal of his petition against Tinubu’s election.

The appellant implores the apex court to overturn the September 6 ruling of the PEPC, which he deems a serious miscarriage of justice against him.

He contends that the PEPC made a legal error by neglecting to invalidate the presidential election due to non-compliance with the Electoral Act of 2022. This, despite the presented evidence demonstrating that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) acted in violation of the established laws and regulations governing election procedures.

He urges the court to affirm that, at the time of the election, Tinubu was not qualified to vie for the presidency.

He implores the court to officially declare him as the victor of the February 25 election and to administer the oath of office, recognizing him as the duly elected President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

In the alternative, the PDP standard-bearer seeks an order directing the electoral commission to conduct a run-off election between himself and Tinubu.

For More News Join Our WhatsApp Group With This Link Below

https://chat.whatsapp.com/HlD7kmxUzAc2lwlP7yuXzk