The candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the February presidential election, Atiku Abubakar, has told the Supreme Court that submitting a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission by a candidate is a weighty constitutional matter that the apex court must consider.
Atiku stated this in a deposition he made to the Supreme Court on Friday while presenting the academic records of President Bola Tinubu as new evidence for consideration in his appeal against the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court.
The former Vice-President, through his lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche, reminded the apex court, “Presentation of a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission by a candidate for election to the office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is a weighty constitutional matter requiring consideration by the courts as custodians of the constitution.”
According to him, from cases already decided by the apex court, it could be seen that there is only one single requirement in this instance, which is the need to do justice fairly, equitably and justly.
In a 20-paragraph affidavit deposed to in support of the appeal number: SC/CV/935/2023 with petition number: CA/PEPC/05/2023, the deponent, one Uyi Giwa-Osagie, a legal practitioner, stated that the certificate Tinubu presented to INEC in support of his qualification to contest the presidential election had been found not to be authentic by the Chicago State University, United States of America, which purportedly issued it.
The documents Atiku sought to tender at the apex court are the academic records of Tinubu, which were handed over to him by the CSU on Monday, October 2, 2023.
The 32-page documents were released to the PDP candidate on the order of Judge Nancy Maldonado of the District Court of Illinois, Eastern Division, Illinois, USA.
Giwa-Osagie added in the deposition, “The deposition is a relevant piece of fresh evidence explaining the status of the certificate the 2nd respondent presented to INEC in support of his qualification to contest the election.”
Uche informed the apex court that Atiku’s legal team would be relying on the Record of Appeal already transmitted to the court, which it was entitled to look at.
“My Lords, we most humbly adopt the facts as presented in the supporting affidavit and the same will be referred to in the course of the argument,” he said.
The senior lawyer submitted that the Supreme Court had the power, the jurisdiction and the discretion to grant an application for adducing fresh or additional evidence on appeal.
Uche added, “We humbly submit that the grant of the present application will certainly be in furtherance of the course of justice in this matter. This is a case in which the 2nd respondent was returned purportedly as the winner of the said election to the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The appellants/applicants have, amongst other grounds, challenged the election of the 2nd respondent on the grounds of his qualification to contest the said election and more especially on the basis that the 2nd respondent presented a forged document to the Independent National Electoral Commission.
“The appellants/applicants have also in their appeal challenged the striking out of their pleadings raising the issue of qualification of the 2nd respondent to contest the said election.
“The evidence required to establish that the certificate presented by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent in support of his qualification to contest the said election is the deposition from the Chicago State University, which deposition did not become available until after the determination of the case by the lower court.
“The said evidence is now available and forwarded to this honourable court.”
He added, “We submit that the appellants/applicants have successfully explained the delay and difficulties in obtaining the said evidence earlier than now, and all the necessary steps taken to obtain the evidence and to present the same to this honourable court.
“We submit that a successful proof of the said allegation will render the 2nd respondent unqualified to have contested the said election ab initio for presentation of forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission pursuant to the provisions of Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution, being a weighty matter of constitutional importance.”
According to him, the Supreme Court had in the case of Saleh vs Abah (2017) held,”The intention of the constitution is that anyone who had presented a forged certificate to INEC should stand automatically disqualified for all future elections if, as in this case, a court or tribunal finds the certificate to have been forged, and it matters not whether or not such fact is further fraudulently or desperately concealed in subsequent elections or declaration forms.
“No decent system or polity should condone, or through judicial policy and decisions, encourage the dangerous culture of forging certificates with impunity to seek electoral contest.”
The Supreme Court has, however, not fixed a date for the hearing of the motion.
