ABUJA – In a significant development on Thursday, the Supreme Court turned down Alhaji Atiku Abubakar’s application to present a copy of President Bola Tinubu’s Chicago State University (CSU) certificate as evidence. The certificate was allegedly obtained by President Tinubu in the United States.
Justice Inyang Okoro delivered the lead judgment, emphasizing that the constitutionally permitted period for introducing such evidence had lapsed. The court cited section 285(5) of the 1999 Constitution, which granted the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) a 180-day window to address presidential election petitions in writing.
The Supreme Court noted that since the PEPC had already delivered its verdict, no legal provision allowed the admission of new evidence during the appeal stage. The 180-day timeframe, as mandated by the Constitution, expired on September 17, rendering the Supreme Court without jurisdiction to admit the document.
Justice Okoro stated, “This court cannot do what the trial court is no longer constitutionally permitted to do,” adding that Atiku and the PDP could not invoke the provisions of Section 22 of the Supreme Court Act.
Furthermore, the court pointed out that Atiku’s attempt to establish a forgery claim through the proposed fresh evidence had not been included in any part of his appeal. It was determined that the appellants no longer had the opportunity to amend their case, as the 21-day period for those dissatisfied with the election’s outcome to file a petition had expired.
Consequently, the Supreme Court refused and dismissed the application, stating that the additional evidence did not pertain to the issues under consideration in the appeal.
Atiku had sought to introduce this fresh evidence to demonstrate that President Tinubu had presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in an effort to qualify for the election.
Chief Chris Uche, SAN, Atiku’s lead counsel, argued that although the 32-page document, released on the orders of Judge Nancy Maldonado of the District Court of Illinois, Eastern Division, Illinois, US, was not originally pleaded, it should be admitted in the interest of justice. Uche stressed that the issue regarding Tinubu’s CSU certificate was significant, and the Supreme Court should prioritize substantial justice over technicalities.
President Tinubu, represented by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, and his legal team, urged the court to reject Atiku’s fresh evidence, arguing that the necessary prerequisites had not been met for the Supreme Court to admit the documents as evidence. He also contended that a deposition by a CSU staff member, which Atiku included to support his application, was conducted in the chambers of a private legal practitioner in the USA.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), represented by Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, urged the court to reject Atiku’s request to present the CSU certificate, as the time allocated for hearing the petition had expired. Akinola Olujimi, SAN, counsel to the All Progressives Congress (APC), argued that Atiku’s application lacked merit and should be dismissed.
