President Bola Tinubu, has presented his academic records before the Presidential Election Petition Court, sitting in Abuja.
Tinubu tendered the academic records obtained from the Chicago State University in the United States of America to counter a suit lodged by the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar challenging his victory as Nigeria’s president.
Recall that the electoral commission, INEC, had declared President Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the February 25th presidential election.
But Atiku, who came second in the race, disputed the outcome of the election.
The PDP presidential candidate consequently filed a petition before the court on 21 March, urging it to overturn Tinubu’s victory.
Atiku’s grouse was hinged on alleged fraudulent academic and criminal records, among other issues, including electoral malpractices.
He concluded the presentation of his case on 23 June, paving the way for Tinubu, the APC and INEC to open their defence.
But, at the resumed proceedings on Tuesday, Tinubu’s lead lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Wole Olanipekun, tendered documents to aid the president’s case.
Olanipekun presented academic records from the Chicago State University, where Mr Tinubu graduated.
He also tendered a letter from the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, clearing Tinubu of any criminal conviction or arrest in the U.S.
In furtherance of his quest to debunk allegations of fraud against Tinubu, Olanipekun tendered the immigration documents of Tinubu’s trips to the U.S. between 2011 and 2021.
He said the documents were certified by the Nigerian Immigration Service.
The lawyer also presented the final results of the presidential election, which declared Mr Tinubu president-elect on 1 March.
Olanipekun told the five-member panel of the court headed by Haruna Tsammani that a “documentary foundation” had been laid for Mr Tinubu’s case.
“We will continue with oral evidence tomorrow by calling witnesses,” he said.
But Atiku’s lawyer, Chris Uche, a SAN, opposed the admissibility of the documents.
Tinubu’s co-respondents – INEC and APC – did not oppose the tendering and admissibility of the papers in evidence.
After admitting the documents in evidence, the court adjourned further hearing until Wednesday.
Among the exhibits that President Tinubu tendered before the court, included a letter dated February 3, 2003, which the Nigeria Police Force, NPF, wrote to the Consul General of the Embassy of the United States of America, in Nigeria, demanding for his criminal record.
As well as a reply the US Embassy sent to the NPF on February 4, 2003, which indicated that there was no criminal file against him.
Other bundle of documents that President Tinubu tendered in court on Tuesday, were his academic records from Chicago State University, his travel records between 2012 and 2021, which was certified on July 3, 2023, by the Nigerian Immigration Service, as well as report of the Committee on the location of the Federal Capital Territory, FCT.
More so, President Tinubu tendered Forms EC8A of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, which represented the polling unit results of the presidential election in Kano State, and equally, Forms EC8D(A), which are the summary of results of the election from all the states of the federation.
Also admitted in evidence by the court was the certified true copy of an Originating Summons marked: SC/CV/354/2023, which the Attorneys-General of six PDP controlled states- Adamawa, Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Delta, Edo and Sokoto- filed at the Supreme Court on February 28 to void the outcome of the presidential election.
The last proof of evidence the President tendered in support of his election victory, were certified copies of six newspaper publications.
Whereas INEC and the All Progressives Congress, APC, through their team of lawyers led by Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, and Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, respectively, did not oppose the tendering of all the documents, however, Atiku and the PDP, vehemently challenged the admissibility of all the exhibits.
The Petitioners said they would adduce reasons behind their objections, in their final written address.
Meanwhile, despite the objection, the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel of the court admitted all the documents in evidence and marked them as Exhibits RA 1 to RA 17.
VANGUARD
