The truth is that, even though I prefer Jonathan to Buhari by a long shot, I am not happy with the way things are turning out. It is increasingly looking like a no-contest with only two possible outcomes - Jonathan's re-election or anarchy.

This certificate saga has effectively ruled out the possibility of a full-fledged Buhari presidency. Even if he participates in and manages to win the election, it is a very easy task for Jonathan and the PDP to get the courts to disqualify Buhari, and render his candidacy and subsequent victory null and void - and the courts will be 100‰ right based on the clear stipulations of the law.

In simple terms, if Buhari cannot show evidence that he attended a secondary school and obtained the requisite school leaving certificate, then he cannot triumph in any legal suit challenging his eligibility - let alone victory- in the election. It is really sad for Nigeria's democracy that this fundamentally unqualified candidate is the best that the main opposition party can put forward.

I was looking forward to a keen contest based on issues, manifestos, ideas, and antecedents. Who would have thought that it will boil down to questions about a secondary school certificate that even the lowliest drunkards and never- do-wells have? If a supposed presidential candidate cannot show evidence of his secondary school certificate, then is that not a massive indictment of our entire political selection process?

I can't believe how stupid the APC as a party is for putting itself in this ridiculous position. As a Democrat, I find this really worrying. They're making this too easy for Jonathan and the PDP.

Finally, the Nigeria Army opens up! The punch Newspaper -
We don't have Buhari's credentials -Army
"The Nigerian Army has said it is not in possession of the
original or photocopies of the credential of presidential
candidate of the All progressive Congress, Gen. Buhari. It said
at a press conference in Abuja on Tuesday that it had a letter
from the principal of Buhari's secondary school, dated 1961,
recommending him for enlistment into the military school"
Uhmmm, the person that want to fight corruption can't even
be honest about his certificate. It is well...

hedonistic:
The truth is that, even though I prefer Jonathan to Buhari by a long shot, I am not happy with the way things are turning out. It is increasingly looking like a no-contest with only two possible outcomes - Jonathan's re-election or anarchy.

This certificate saga has effectively ruled out the possibility of a full-fledged Buhari presidency. Even if he participates in and manages to win the election, it is a very easy task for Jonathan and the PDP to get the courts to disqualify Buhari, and render his candidacy and subsequent victory null and void - and the courts will be 100‰ right based on the clear stipulations of the law.

In simple terms, if Buhari cannot show evidence that he attended a secondary school and obtained the requisite school leaving certificate, then he cannot triumph in any legal suit challenging his eligibility - let alone victory- in the election. It is really sad for Nigeria's democracy that this fundamentally unqualified candidate is the best that the main opposition party can put forward.

I can't believe how stupid the APC as a party is for putting itself in this ridiculous position. As a Democrat, I find this really worrying. They're making this too easy for Jonathan and the PDP.

If I were you I wont open the champagne bottle YET.........

We are all living witnesses to the government run by a Phee HD holder.

Wetin FEE DEE FEE dey wait for?
Oya, DISQUALIFY THE BUHARI, make we see the real ACTION!!!!!!

Buhari can never ever be president...Nigerians know that one tey tey...
Even Buhari know that one!

You don't understand the law. He who asserts must prove. If PDP takes Buhari to court accusing him of not having a WAEC certificate then the onus is on them to prove their case in court beyond a reasonable doubt. Buhari actually doesn't have to prove anything. His affidavit is a legal court endorsed document and suffices for election purposes.

Paid Goon

babadee1:
You don't understand the law. He who asserts must prove. If PDP takes Buhari to court accusing him of not having a WAEC certificate then the onus is on them to prove their case in court beyond a reasonable doubt. Buhari actually doesn't have to prove anything. His affidavit is a legal court endorsed document and suffices for election purposes.

On the contrary, it is you who does not have sufficient understanding of the law. An affidavit is not a magical document that automatically ends all argument and renders all enquiry unnecessary. Instead, an affidavit is merely a signed document wherein a person makes a sworn statement concerning a specific matter.

Buhari did not swear in his affidavit submitted to INEC that his certificates got missing or destroyed at some point. He swore that his certificates were in the possession of the Secretary of the Military Board. As you would know by now, earlier today, the Army High Command released a statement stating that it DOES NOT have Buhari's secondary school certificate (original or photocopy) in its possession. What does that tell you?

Buhari's case is even more complicated than I reckoned. Not only is he unqualified to contest for ANY electoral position in the land (let alone the presidency), he also evidently committed the criminal offence of perjury by lying under oath!

The onus is not on the PDP to prove that Buhari does not have a certificate. The onus is on the PDP to (1) simply tender evidence indicating that Buhari did not fulfil the requirements of the law (by appending a copy of his qualification to his INEC form); and (2) Provide evidence (using Buhari's own affidavit and the Army's statement today) to show that Buhari lied under oath. Either way, it is really easy to throw this Buhari of a man under the bus. His case is extremely weak - to the point of ridiculousness.

hedonistic:


On the contrary, it is you who does not have sufficient understanding of the law. An affidavit is not a magical document that automatically ends all argument and renders all enquiry unnecessary. Instead, an affidavit is merely a signed document wherein a person makes a sworn statement concerning a specific matter.

Buhari did not swear in his affidavit submitted to INEC that his certificates got missing or destroyed at some point. He swore that his certificates were in the possession of the Secretary of the Military Board. As you would know by now, earlier today, the Army High Command released a statement stating that it DOES NOT have Buhari's secondary school certificate (original or photocopy) in its possession. What does that tell you?

Buhari's case is even more complicated than I reckoned. Not only is he unqualified to contest for ANY electoral position in the land (let alone the presidency), he also evidently committed the criminal offence of perjury by lying under oath!

The onus is not on the PDP to prove that Buhari does of have a certificate. The onus is on the PDP to (1) simply tender evidence indicating that Buhari did not fulfil the requirements of the law (by appending a copy of his qualification to his INEC form); and (2) Provide evidence (using Buhari's own affidavit and the Army's statement today) to show that Buhari lied under oath. Either way, it is really easy to throw this Buhari of a man man under the bus. His case is extremely week to the point of ridiculousness.

He is not constitutionally required to append his qualification to his INEC form. He is only required by law to have the said qualification, which is a senior school leaving certificate or its equivalent. Several experts in law including the eminent constitutional lawyer Prof. Itse Sagay have made the submission that Buhari's cadet training, military courses and war college diploma already supersede that requirement.

The issue is not as cut and dried as you think. Contrary to what you maintain, PDP has to show conclusive evidence that Buhari does not have the required certificate. All Buhari has to assert is that without the said certificate he could not have been employed by the military and without the minimum requisite education he could not have performed creditably well in his subsequent academic pursuits.

babadee1:


He is not constitutionally required to append his qualification to his INEC form. He is only required by law to have the said qualification, which is a senior school leaving certificate or its equivalent. Several experts in law including the eminent constitutional lawyer Prof. Itse Sagay have made the submission that Buhari's cadet training, military courses and war college diploma already supersede that requirement.

The issue is not as cut and dried as you think. Contrary to what you maintain, PDP has to show conclusive evidence that Buhari does not have the required certificate. All Buhari has to assert is that without the said certificate he could not have been employed by the military and without the minimum requisite education he could not have performed creditably well in his subsequent academic pursuits.

My friend, there are too many fallacies in this submission of yours. Apart from shifting the burden of proof (by suggesting that Buhari does not need to prove that he attended secondary school), your suggestion that he could not have been employed by the military (an institution that, like all others in Nigeria has always been blighted by corruption, tribalism, and nepotism) is ridiculous, more so considering the period when Buhari enlisted.

Besides, using the opinions of "experts" like Prof. Sagay to buttress your point is also fallacious as that does not constitute conclusive fact in any way. More so as other equally eminent constitutional lawyers (for example Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) and Mike Ozekhome (SAN) have separately stated that Buhari risks disqualification for failing to meet the REVISED requirements of INEC for the 2015 elections and onwards. Or will you argue that Prof. Sagay's opinion is more valid than other equally distinguished SANs such as Agbakoba?

Former President of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), Olisa Agbakoba (SAN), said that General Muhammadu Buhari,
presidential candidate from the All Progressive Congress (APC), could be disqualified from contesting the 2015 general election.
In a video of the Channels TV, Agbakoba said he had had a good look at the nomination form, especially as the current form for the 2015 elections is different. The new form has a fragment titled
‘Produce Evidence Of Qualification’. In his view, this part was not filled in properly by General Buhari and this might
cause a problem down the line....

www.nigerianbulletin.com/threads/video-buhari-risks-disqualification-by-not-properly-completing-inec-form-olisa-agbakoba.106539/

Hmmm apc is a fraud, their presidential candidate fraud, supporters fraud, defectors fraud. Na wah o. Just thinking aloud.

hedonistic:


My friend, there are too many fallacies in this submission of yours. Apart from shifting the burden of proof (by suggesting that Buhari does not need to prove that he attended secondary school), your suggestion that he could not have been employed by the military (an institution that, like all others in Nigeria has always been blighted by corruption, tribalism, and nepotism) is ridiculous, more so considering the period when Buhari enlisted.

Besides, using the opinions of "experts" like Prof. Sagay to buttress your point is also fallacious as that does not constitute conclusive fact in any way. More so as other equally eminent constitutional lawyers (for example Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) and Mike Ozekhome (SAN) have separately stated that Buhari risks disqualification for failing to meet the REVISED requirements of INEC for the 2015 elections and onwards. Or will you argue that Prof. Sagay's opinion is more valid than other equally distinguished SANs such as Agbakoba?

I have not shifted the burden of proof. In law the burden of proof always lies with the accuser. A prosecutor cannot take an accused armed robber to court and say "prove you are not an armed robber." The prosecutor has the burden of proof not the accused, that is actually where the presumption of innocence legal doctrine comes from. If PDP takes Buhari to court, it's for them to prove his guilt not for him to prove his innocence.

I didn't say he absolutely couldn't have been employed without a certificate. I said he can use as a defense to answer the charges the fact that the army screened him and found him qualified to join the military. Like the army spokesman said the military has a screening process where they verify the credentials of recruits before enlisting them. His explanation that his certificates were carted away by soldiers under IBB after he was deposed is a plausible one. Likewise, the military board could have had a copy of his certificate at one time and then later lost it. These are all plausible scenarios which create reasonable doubt.

The opinions of lawyers and SANs remain their opinions. My point was that there are eminent lawyers who hold opinions on both sides of the argument, so don't talk like it's a done deal for your side of the case.

Finally you misunderstand the legal role of INEC in controversial issues like these. The Supreme Court has ruled that INEC cannot disqualify candidates. They can make rules but those rules can be later found to be unconstitutional. The revised requirements of INEC asking for candidates to display their credentials may actually be unconstitutional or at the very least extra-constitutional. It may likely not hold up in a competent court of law.

Buhari has sworn affidavit saying the military has his certificate. The military does not and never received his certificate.

The only thing they received on file was the letter of recommendation. So Buhari has lied under oath (isn't that corruption?)