Certificate: Fresh trouble for Tinubu as Atiku makes fresh moves against Asiwaju

Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the 2023 elections, has taken another step in his pursuit to challenge the legitimacy of President Bola Tinubu’s qualification. Atiku has applied to the Supreme Court, seeking approval to introduce fresh evidence that he believes supports his claim that President Tinubu submitted forged documents to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for the 2023 presidential election.

Atiku’s legal team, led by Chief Chris Uche, SAN, filed the motion requesting the court’s permission to tender this new evidence, which they argue will substantiate their allegation of forgery against President Tinubu. The evidence in question is academic records purportedly obtained from the Chicago State University (CSU), intended to establish the alleged wrongdoing by President Tinubu.

The former Vice President’s application is grounded in the Supreme Court Rules 1985, Section 137(1) of the 1999 Constitution, and the court’s inherent jurisdiction. These legal foundations provide a framework for the presentation of new evidence when it is deemed essential for the resolution of an appeal.

Atiku maintains that President Tinubu’s alleged actions amount to forgery and perjury, warranting his removal from office. The sought-after evidence includes a 32-page deposition on oath from CSU, dated October 2, 2023, disclaiming the authenticity of the certificate submitted by Tinubu to INEC. The applicant argues that this evidence is pivotal for the proper resolution of the appeal.

Atiku’s legal team emphasized the significance of this evidence in shedding light on the authenticity of President Tinubu’s certificate and the gravity of the constitutional matter at hand. They contend that this constitutional issue should be thoroughly examined, as it challenges the eligibility of the 2nd Respondent to run for office. The Supreme Court will assess the application and decide on its admissibility in due course.