₦airaland Forum

Welcome, Guest: Register • Login • With Google • Trending • Recent • New

Stats: 3,345,180 members, 8,515,944 topics. Date: Monday, 09 November 2026 at 07:56 PM

Toggle theme

Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court - Politics - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum › Nairaland General › Politics › Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court (986 Views)

1 Reply (Go Down)

Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Jatuski(op): 5:23pm On Oct 07, 2023
The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP,), Atiku Abubakar has filed a fresh evidence of forgery from Chicago at the Supreme Court of Nigeria against the qualifications of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the February 25, 2023 presidential election.

Atiku, a former Vice President, asserted categorically and authoritatively that the Diploma Certificate of the Chicago State University (CSU) used by Tinubu to secure qualifications for participation in the 2023 election is fake having been allegedly forged.

In a motion on notice filed by his legal team headed by Chris Uche (SAN), Atiku asked the Supreme Court to invoke its Order 2 Rule 12 of 1985 to admit the fresh evidence of certificate forgery and perjury in support of his pending appeal before the Court to do substantial justice to his case.

Atiku in the motion marked SC/CV/935/2023 prayed the Apex Court to grant him leave to produce the additional evidence and for the Court to receive the fresh evidence from him.

Respondents in the motion are the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and the All Progressives Congress (APC) as 1st to 3rd respectfully.

The motion is predicated on several grounds but mainly on the release of Academic Records of Tinubu, evidence of the Registrar of the Chicago State University before a United States of America Court and the deposition of the same witness in respect of the Diploma Certificate President Tinubu presented to the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC for the purpose of eligibility for the election.

Other grounds in the motion are that "The 2nd Respondent ( Tinubu) was not qualified at the time of the election to contest the election as required by section 137 (1) (j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

"Based on facts available to the Appellants/Applicants (Atiku) at the time of filing their Petition, the 1st Appellants/Applicant (Atiku Abubakar) through his United States of American lawyers, Alexander de Gramont and Argela M. Liu of the law firm of Dechert LLP, unsuccessfully applied to Chicago State University for the release of copies of the academic records of the 2nd Respondent.

"Given the strict privacy laws in the jurisdiction of Chicago State University, the request for the release of the academic records and certificate issued to the 2nd Respondent could not be granted without an order, of court and for the purpose of use in pending court proceedings.

The 1st Applicant through his said US-based Attomeys thereupon, brought an action in the U.S. District Court for the Northem District of Illinois in re: Application of Atiku Abubakar for an Order Directing Discovery from Chicago State University Case No. 23-CV-05099 for an order for the production of documents and testimony for use in a proceeding in a foreign court, seeking documents and testimony from Chicago State University concening the authenticity and origin of documents purporting to be the educational records of the 2nd Respondent, Bola A.Tinubu.

"The 2nd Respondent (Tinubu) applied and was joined in the matter as an Intervenor,
vehemently opposed the application.

"On September 19, 2023, the Court issued an order granting the application and thereafter, the 2nd Respondent applied for an emergency stay of the Court Order, claiming that he would suffer irreparable damage and irjury if his educational records were released: which order of stay was granted.

"On September 30, 2023, the Court overruled the 2nd Respondent's objections and ordered Chicago State University to produce tbe documents on October 2, 2023, and to produce a witness for deposition on October 3, 2023.

"On October 2, 2023. Chlcago State University produced the documents pursuant to the Court's Order.

"On October 3, 2023, also pursuant to the Court's Order, Chicago State University provided a witness to give deposition testimony, in which deposition, Chicago State University disclaimed ownership and authorship of the document that the 2nd Respondent presented to INEC, purporting to be "Chicago State University certificate" and also disclaimed issuing any replacement certificate to him.

"The deposition was not in existence or available at the time of filing the petition.

"The deposition sought to be adduced is, along with its accompanying documents, such as would have important effect in the resolution of this appeal.

"The deposition is relevant to this matter, having confirmed that the certificate presented by the 2nd Respondent to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) did not emanate from Chicago State University, and that whoever issued the certificate presented by the 2nd Respondent, did not have the authority of the Chicago State University, and that the 2nd Respondent never applied for any replacement certificate
nor was he issued any replacement certificate by the Chicago State University.

"The deposition which is on oath and deposed to in the presence of the 2nd Respondent's Attorney is credible and believable and ought to be believed.

"The deposition is clear and unambiguous, and no further evidence is needed to be adduced on it. The evidence is such that could not have been obtained without reasonable
diligence for use at the trial, as the deposition required the commencement of the suit in the United States of America before receiving same. It is not possible to obtain the said evidence before the trial at the Court below.

"The deposition was made on October 03, 2Q23 after the conclusion of trial at the Court below, and was not available to be tendered at the trial.

"Presentation of a forged Certificate to the lndependent National Electoral Commission by a candidate in an election to the office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is a weighty constitutional matter,
requiring consideration by the Court as custodians of the Constitution.

"The original certified deposition has been forwarded to the Honourable Court by a letter addressed to the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court

"It is in the interest of justice for the Honourable Court to exercise its discretion in favour of the Appellants/Applicants.

The motion was supported by an affidavit deposed to on behalf of Atiku and PDP by one Uyi Giwa-Osagie, a legal practitioner.

The affidavit read in part "That the 1st Appellant/Applicant contested the election to the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the platform of the 2nd Appellant/Applicant, which election was conducted by the 1st Respondent on the 25th day of February 2023.

"That the 1st Respondent retuned the 2nd Respondent as the winner of the said election, and hence the Appellants, being dissatisfied with tle retum, filed a Petition on the 21st day of March 2023 before the Court of Appeal sitting as the Presidential Election Petition Count.

"That the Court below had by a judgment delivered on 6th September 2023 dismissed the said Petition, whereupon the Appellants/Applicants appealed against the said judgment to this Honourable Court in
September 2023.

"That the Record of Appeal has been transmitted to this Honourable Court
and the appeal duly entered, and the said Record of Appeal is now before this Honourable Court, running into over 9,000 pages in 11 Volumes, upon which the Appellants/Applicants are relying in this application.

"That I know that one of the grounds of the Appellants/Applicants' Petition before the Court below is that the 2nd Respondent (Tinubu) was not qualified at the time of the election to contest the election and did not meet the constitutional threshold to contest

Meanwhile, no date has yet been fixed for hearing of the motion.

Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Dpen11(f): 5:24pm On Oct 07, 2023
He is always ready
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Tracka: 5:27pm On Oct 07, 2023
..... good luck
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by izonborn098(m): 5:27pm On Oct 07, 2023
.
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by duro4chang(m): 5:49pm On Oct 07, 2023
Another useless fishing expendition. Atiku should have direct his energy and resources towards poverty alleviation especially in the north east
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Goldenchyke(m): 5:50pm On Oct 07, 2023
Jatuski:
The presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP,), Atiku Abubakar has filed a fresh evidence of forgery from Chicago at the Supreme Court of Nigeria against the qualifications of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the February 25, 2023 presidential election.

Atiku, a former Vice President, asserted categorically and authoritatively that the Diploma Certificate of the Chicago State University (CSU) used by Tinubu to secure qualifications for participation in the 2023 election is fake having been allegedly forged.

In a motion on notice filed by his legal team headed by Chris Uche (SAN), Atiku asked the Supreme Court to invoke its Order 2 Rule 12 of 1985 to admit the fresh evidence of certificate forgery and perjury in support of his pending appeal before the Court to do substantial justice to his case.

Atiku in the motion marked SC/CV/935/2023 prayed the Apex Court to grant him leave to produce the additional evidence and for the Court to receive the fresh evidence from him.

Respondents in the motion are the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and the All Progressives Congress (APC) as 1st to 3rd respectfully.

The motion is predicated on several grounds but mainly on the release of Academic Records of Tinubu, evidence of the Registrar of the Chicago State University before a United States of America Court and the deposition of the same witness in respect of the Diploma Certificate President Tinubu presented to the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC for the purpose of eligibility for the election.

Other grounds in the motion are that "The 2nd Respondent ( Tinubu) was not qualified at the time of the election to contest the election as required by section 137 (1) (j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended).

"Based on facts available to the Appellants/Applicants (Atiku) at the time of filing their Petition, the 1st Appellants/Applicant (Atiku Abubakar) through his United States of American lawyers, Alexander de Gramont and Argela M. Liu of the law firm of Dechert LLP, unsuccessfully applied to Chicago State University for the release of copies of the academic records of the 2nd Respondent.

"Given the strict privacy laws in the jurisdiction of Chicago State University, the request for the release of the academic records and certificate issued to the 2nd Respondent could not be granted without an order, of court and for the purpose of use in pending court proceedings.

The 1st Applicant through his said US-based Attomeys thereupon, brought an action in the U.S. District Court for the Northem District of Illinois in re: Application of Atiku Abubakar for an Order Directing Discovery from Chicago State University Case No. 23-CV-05099 for an order for the production of documents and testimony for use in a proceeding in a foreign court, seeking documents and testimony from Chicago State University concening the authenticity and origin of documents purporting to be the educational records of the 2nd Respondent, Bola A.Tinubu.

"The 2nd Respondent (Tinubu) applied and was joined in the matter as an Intervenor,
vehemently opposed the application.

"On September 19, 2023, the Court issued an order granting the application and thereafter, the 2nd Respondent applied for an emergency stay of the Court Order, claiming that he would suffer irreparable damage and irjury if his educational records were released: which order of stay was granted.

"On September 30, 2023, the Court overruled the 2nd Respondent's objections and ordered Chicago State University to produce tbe documents on October 2, 2023, and to produce a witness for deposition on October 3, 2023.

"On October 2, 2023. Chlcago State University produced the documents pursuant to the Court's Order.

"On October 3, 2023, also pursuant to the Court's Order, Chicago State University provided a witness to give deposition testimony, in which deposition, Chicago State University disclaimed ownership and authorship of the document that the 2nd Respondent presented to INEC, purporting to be "Chicago State University certificate" and also disclaimed issuing any replacement certificate to him.

"The deposition was not in existence or available at the time of filing the petition.

"The deposition sought to be adduced is, along with its accompanying documents, such as would have important effect in the resolution of this appeal.

"The deposition is relevant to this matter, having confirmed that the certificate presented by the 2nd Respondent to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) did not emanate from Chicago State University, and that whoever issued the certificate presented by the 2nd Respondent, did not have the authority of the Chicago State University, and that the 2nd Respondent never applied for any replacement certificate
nor was he issued any replacement certificate by the Chicago State University.

"The deposition which is on oath and deposed to in the presence of the 2nd Respondent's Attorney is credible and believable and ought to be believed.

"The deposition is clear and unambiguous, and no further evidence is needed to be adduced on it. The evidence is such that could not have been obtained without reasonable
diligence for use at the trial, as the deposition required the commencement of the suit in the United States of America before receiving same. It is not possible to obtain the said evidence before the trial at the Court below.

"The deposition was made on October 03, 2Q23 after the conclusion of trial at the Court below, and was not available to be tendered at the trial.

"Presentation of a forged Certificate to the lndependent National Electoral Commission by a candidate in an election to the office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is a weighty constitutional matter,
requiring consideration by the Court as custodians of the Constitution.

"The original certified deposition has been forwarded to the Honourable Court by a letter addressed to the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court

"It is in the interest of justice for the Honourable Court to exercise its discretion in favour of the Appellants/Applicants.

The motion was supported by an affidavit deposed to on behalf of Atiku and PDP by one Uyi Giwa-Osagie, a legal practitioner.

The affidavit read in part "That the 1st Appellant/Applicant contested the election to the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on the platform of the 2nd Appellant/Applicant, which election was conducted by the 1st Respondent on the 25th day of February 2023.

"That the 1st Respondent retuned the 2nd Respondent as the winner of the said election, and hence the Appellants, being dissatisfied with tle retum, filed a Petition on the 21st day of March 2023 before the Court of Appeal sitting as the Presidential Election Petition Count.

"That the Court below had by a judgment delivered on 6th September 2023 dismissed the said Petition, whereupon the Appellants/Applicants appealed against the said judgment to this Honourable Court in
September 2023.

"That the Record of Appeal has been transmitted to this Honourable Court
and the appeal duly entered, and the said Record of Appeal is now before this Honourable Court, running into over 9,000 pages in 11 Volumes, upon which the Appellants/Applicants are relying in this application.

"That I know that one of the grounds of the Appellants/Applicants' Petition before the Court below is that the 2nd Respondent (Tinubu) was not qualified at the time of the election to contest the election and did not meet the constitutional threshold to contest

Meanwhile, no date has yet been fixed for hearing of the motion.
"The deposition which is on oath and deposed to in the presence of the 2nd Respondent's Attorney is credible and believable and ought to be believed.
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by pandoragirigory: 5:54pm On Oct 07, 2023
Effort in futility
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Jostoman: 6:11pm On Oct 07, 2023
duro4chang:
Another useless fishing expendition. Atiku should have direct his energy and resources towards poverty alleviation especially in the north east
Let him finish with this one first, just wish him gud luck and move on.
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Jostoman: 6:13pm On Oct 07, 2023
BAT Supporters will not like this news o.
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by AwokenVawulence: 6:13pm On Oct 07, 2023
An
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by spako4(m): 6:29pm On Oct 07, 2023
Desperate Atiku is at it again.
He wants to be president by fire or by force.
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by duro4chang(m): 6:46pm On Oct 07, 2023
Jostoman:
Let him finish with this one first, just wish him gud luck and move on.
You may wish him goodluck, I will not.
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Ofunaofu: 7:21pm On Oct 07, 2023
duro4chang:
Another useless fishing expendition. Atiku should have direct his energy and resources towards poverty alleviation especially in the north east
Just wish Atiku good luck in his fishing expedition
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by duro4chang(m): 7:25pm On Oct 07, 2023
Ofunaofu:
Just wish Atiku good luck in his fishing expedition
And you think I will do that? I know you are kidding.
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Ofunaofu: 7:26pm On Oct 07, 2023
duro4chang:
And you think I will do that? I know you are kidding.
Please do

It's just a fishing expedition
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by duro4chang(m): 7:29pm On Oct 07, 2023
Ofunaofu:
Please do

It's just a fishing expedition
And you think he will catch a single fish while fish in a desert?
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Ofunaofu: 7:30pm On Oct 07, 2023
duro4chang:
And you think he will catch a single fish while fish in a desert?
Just wish him good luck

It won't take any thing away from you
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by duro4chang(m): 7:34pm On Oct 07, 2023
Ofunaofu:
Just wish him good luck
It won't take any thing away from you
Stop pulling my legs.
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by accordadoga30(f): 7:44pm On Oct 07, 2023
Hehehehehe

This one's lawyer must be an Igbo
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Ofunaofu: 7:45pm On Oct 07, 2023
grin
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by Ofunaofu:
Jatuski:
In a motion on notice filed by his legal team headed by Chris Uche (SAN), Atiku asked the Supreme Court to invoke its Order 2 Rule 12 of 1985 to admit the fresh evidence of certificate forgery and perjury in support of his pending appeal before the Court to do substantial justice to his case.
Here is what Order 2 Rule 12 says

Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by duro4chang(m): 7:57pm On Oct 07, 2023
Jostoman:
BAT Supporters will not like this news o.
Your Atiku will still fail
Re: Forgery: Atiku Files Fresh Evidence Against Tinubu At Supreme Court by opamoses1: 7:59pm On Oct 07, 2023
Waste of time. I was expecting them to hit the street.

All the court needs to know is that.... did the president graduate? A "yes" answer which Carl Westberg of CSU already confirmed would ensure the case is thrown out.
1 Reply

Kanu Files Fresh Motion, Says His Trial Is Void Due To 4 Jurisdictional Defects • Atiku Files Fresh Suit For Tinubu's Records To Be Released By CSU • Atiku Files Fresh Lawsuit Against Tinubu In America - Aide • 2 • 3 • 4

Next Governor Of Edo State • 'Dangote, Port Harcourt Refineries Won’t Reduce Fuel Price’ – Rewane • Rivers Works Commissioner Resigns, Joins Tinubu’s Govt