₦airaland Forum

Fresh Information made available to POLITICS NIGERIA may put to rest the recent controversy surrounding the educational qualifications and age of the 2023 Presidential Candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

Findings by this newspaper reveal that several petitions and suits challenging Tinubu's age and qualifications in the past have either been dismissed or discredited for lack of merit.

Below is a Timeline of these cases;

August 12, 1999: Petition by Alhaji Jameed Seriki of No. 62 Balogun Street, West, Lagos, and one Dr. Waliu Balogun-Smith of No. 5, Unity Road, Ikeja alleging tinubu falsified his age and educational qualifications

Tuesday, September 21, 1999: following a motion moved by Honourable Tajudeen Jaiyeola Agoro representing Lagos Mainland Constituency, the Speaker of the Lagos House of Assembly, Dr. Adeleke Olorunimbe Mamora, set up a five-man ad hoc committee to investigate the allegations and report back to the House. The committee comprised Hon. Babajide Omoworare (Chairman), Hon. Thomas Ayodele Fadeyi, Hon. Adeniyi Akinmade, Hon. Ibrahim Gbola Gbabijo and Hon Saliu Olaitan Mustapha. The petitioners never attended the hearings but Tinubu was still investigated. Femi Falana represented Tinubu as his Lawyer. Investigations reveal the petitioners wrote the petition under fictitious names and never existed.

In its report to the House, the Committee stated that “The Committee deemed it fit to invite the petitioners and therefore wrote the petitioners. The letters were sent by courier.

June 2000: Appeal Court dismissed Gani’s suit against Tinubu on this

May 2002: The Supreme Court dismissed another suit by Gani on this. Note: the supreme court said the Lagos State House of Assembly is the only body that could probe Governor Tinubu then. And they did an intensive investigation. He was cleared of all charges

June 2013: Federal High Court Lagos dismissed Dr Adegbola’s suit against Tinubu on the same certificate forgery Matter.

The findings of the adhoc panel report:

But the courts, including the Supreme Court held that as a sitting governor cloaked with constitutional guaranteed immunity, Tinubu could not be investigated.

The only body that can investigate the governor was the Lagos House of Assembly, the apex court had ruled.

Onabolu acknowledged that questions about Tinubu’s certificates, institutions and age raised by Adedayo are critical and cannot be ignored especially by someone who wants to be President of Nigeria.

But he insisted that the questions have been thoroughly investigated and conclusively addressed by the appropriate institutional authority legally competent to do so when they were raised in the petitions written in 1999.

So, what were the findings of the lawmakers and Tinubu’s defence about the allegations of forgery levelled against him?

Read a detailed account as excerpted from Onabolu’s column published this Saturday titled, Festus Adedayo, Tinubu and the Character Question below:

Shortly after he was sworn in as governor of Lagos State in May 1999, there were allegations widely published in the media that Tinubu had perjured and forged the credentials that qualified him to run for the gubernatorial election in the state.

The allegations were contained in a petition dated August 12, 1999, written by one Alhaji Jameed Seriki of No. 62 Balogun Street, West, Lagos, and one Dr. Waliu Balogun-Smith of No. 5, Unity Road, Ikeja.

The kernel of their allegations were: (1) that there was a discrepancy in the age of the governor since the profile published during his inauguration stated that he was born in 1952 and the age on his transcript at the Chicago State University claimed that he was born in 1954; (2) that the governor did not attend Government College, Ibadan, as was stated in his profile and INEC FORM CF.001; and (3) the governor did not attend University of Chicago as claimed in INEC FORM CF and an affidavit sworn to at the Ikeja High Court of Justice on 29th December 1998.

It was unanimously agreed by all legal authorities that the governor enjoyed legal immunity courtesy Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution and that the Lagos State House of Assembly was the only competent institution that could investigate the governor and take punitive action against him if he was deemed to have committed acts constituting gross misconduct.

Consequently, following a motion moved by Honourable Tajudeen Jaiyeola Agoro representing Lagos Mainland Constituency, the Speaker, Dr. Adeleke Olorunimbe Mamora, on Tuesday, September 21, 1999, set up a five-man ad hoc committee to investigate the allegations and report back to the House. The committee comprised Hon. Babajide Omoworare (Chairman), Hon. Thomas Ayodele Fadeyi, Hon. Adeniyi Akinmade, Hon. Ibrahim Gbola Gbabijo and Hon Saliu Olaitan Mustapha.

In its report to the House, the Committee stated that “The Committee deemed it fit to invite the petitioners and therefore wrote the petitioners. The letters were sent by courier.

The petitioners did not attend the hearing and we have not heard from them up till now. We visited their address at 62 Balogun Street, West, Lagos and 5, Unity Road, Ikeja, Lagos, on Wednesday, September 22, 1999 and found out that the petitioners neither reside nor carry on any business at the addresses. Hence, we concluded that the petition was written in fictitious names. Attached herewith and marked “Annexures 1 and 2” are pictures of the buildings bearing the above addresses taken when the Committee visited the addresses. Also attached and marked “Annexxures 3 and 4″ are copies of the evidence of courier of the letters forwarded to the fictitious Petitioners”. Despite this, the Committee continued with its investigation.

Continuing, the committee stated in its report that “The Committee invited Editors of ThisDay Newspaper because of the prominence, which they have given to the publication of the allegations. The Editors of ThisDay visited us informally, refusing to oblige our invitation and informing us that they would rely on their publications”. The governor appeared before the Committee on Thursday, September 23, 1999, alongside his counsel Mr. Femi Falana who was then not yet a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN).

According to the report, “The Governor of Lagos State started his evidence by admitting “full responsibility” for some of the “needless errors” being pointed at in recent publications and which formed the basis of allegations against him. The Governor told the Committee that as a result of the acrimonious primaries of the Alliance for Democracy in Lagos State and its attendant crisis, the information contained in both the INEC form and affidavit of loss of certificates was supplied by Senator Tokunbo Afikuyomi.

The Governor then submitted to the Committee a copy of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) senatorial candidate form dated June 1, 1992, which he used to contest the 1992 Senatorial election as candidate of the party for Lagos West. In the form, which he personally filled, the Governor attached the certificates of Richard Daley College and Chicago State University. For his educational qualifications he filled B.Sc Accounting only”.

According to the committee report, “This according to him demonstrated that “needless errors” spotted in the 1999 INEC form were not consistent and that they were “genuine errors”. He further directed the attention of the committee to the INEC form CFO1 that bore a wrong date of twenty-eight December 1999 instead of twenty-eight December 1998. The error he said was made by INEC which printed the form. And not even the Commissioner of Oath detected the error. This in his view further confirmed that the hurried and confused manner under which the preparations for the governorship primaries of 1998 were made gave room to error on all sides”.

Giving further insight into their interaction with the governor, the committee report stated: “The Governor spoke about his difficult and traumatic youth and how he scaled the hurdles of life as a self made man. After his primary education, the Governor said he was admitted into secondary school but he could not further his education because of his poverty. The Governor thus had to engage in menial jobs before he proceeded to the United States of America in search of the Golden Fleece. The Governor informed us that in America, he undertook various odd jobs and tried to improve himself academically. After five years of the most harrowing work experience, the Governor said he enrolled at Richard Daley College in Chicago, which among others offers basic, remedial and academic classes, preparatory to entering Chicago State University. He presented a photocopy of a certificate issued by Richard Daley College (City Colleges of Chicago), a copy of which is attached as herewith and marked as “Annexure 5″.

Throughout the time he studied in Chicago, the Governor said he also had to fend for himself and that he actually paid his way through school by working extra hours as a tutor in the same university.

He said he studied for extra hours especially during summer. The Governor said 27 (twenty seven) credit hours were transferred from Richard Daley College to Chicago State University, where he obtained Bachelor of Science in Business and Administration. His major was in Accounting”.

Most recently, Chicago state University confirmed that Tinubu attended the University from August 1977 to June 1979.

PlayerMeji:
Bola this Bola that...

What about Atiku.. Nobody is even saying a word about that man..

Wow..

God has blessed this Bola Tinubu with the sort of blessings most people pray to have.. To be the talk of the town!

helinues:
Toh

How do you expect wailers to take this clarification...

Hope they are not going to shit their intestines

Fahdiga:
Where's Yekini's certificates?

helinues:
But Rashidi Yekini is dead now

Why asking for his certificate?

Fahdiga:
We are talking about Yekini Amoda Ogunlere aka Bola Ahmed Tinubu here. Don't deviate from the topic.

helinues:
And yet you accused me of being toxic on this forum yet almost all your comments are full of toxicity?

Have you seen me calling Obi Pandora before or Obituary?

Yet you are asking for Rashidi Yekini's certificate, can a dead person contest an election?

The way others think about you on this forum, you have no clue

That a person protected under Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution, going by its provisions, can be investigated by the police for an alleged crime or offence is, in my view, beyond dispute. To hold otherwise is to create a monstrous situation whose manifestation may not be fully appreciated until illustrated.

I shall give three possible instances. Suppose it is alleged that a Governor, in the course of driving his personal car, recklessly ran over a man, killing him; he sends the car to a workshop for the repairs of the dented or damaged part or parts. Or that he used a pistol to shoot a man dead and threw the gun into a nearby bush. Or that he stole public money and kept it in a particular bank or used it to acquire property. Now, if the police became aware, could it be suggested in an open and democratic society like ours that they would be precluded by Section 308 from investigating to know the identity of the man killed, the cause of death from autopsy report, the owner of the car taken to the workshop and if there is any evidence from the inspection of the car that it hit an object recently, more particularly a human being; or to take steps to recover the gun and test for ballistic evidence; and generally to take statements from eye-witnesses of either incident of killing. Or to find out (if possible) about the money lodged in the bank or for acquiring property, and to get particulars of the account and the source of the money; or of the property acquired?

The Police clearly have a duty under Section 4 of the Police Act to do all they can to investigate and preserve whatever evidence is available. The evidence or some aspect of it may be the type which might be lost forever if not preserved while it is available, and in the particular instances given it can be seen that the offences are very serious ones which the society would be unlikely to overlook if it had its way. The evidence may be useful for impeachment purposes if the House of Assembly may have need of it. It may no doubt be used for prosecution of the said incumbent Governor after he has left office. But to do nothing under pretext that a Governor cannot be investigated is a disservice to the society. I therefore answer Issue 1 in the affirmative.