October 26 (THEWILL) – The Supreme Court of Nigeria has rejected request by Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the 2023 General election, Atiku Abubakar, to tender fresh evidence of forgery against President Bola Tinubu.
“This motion for fresh deposition cannot be granted and hereby rejected”, Justice Inyang Okoro held.
THEWILLL reports that the documents Atiku sought to tender before the apex court are the academic records of President Tinubu, released to the former Vice President by the Chicago State University (CSU) on October 2, 2023.
The 32-page document was released to Atiku on the orders of Judge Nancy Maldonado of the District Court of Illinois, Eastern Division, Illinois, United States of America.
Atiku had argued that President Tinubu was not qualified to contest the February 25 Presidential poll because he allegedly submitted a forged diploma certificate to INEC.
While the respondents, in their separate replies, argued that the Supreme Court cannot accept fresh documents since the 180 days provided by law for the hearing of the petition against the February 25 presidential election has lapsed.
According to them, the apex court lacked the necessary jurisdiction to receive and decide on the fresh evidence having not been presented within 180 days.
But, in his argument, the former Vice President, through his lead counsel, Chris Uche (SAN), submitted that contrary to the avowed position of the respondents, “there is no such constitutional limit of 180 days on the lower court to hear and determine a presidential election petition, such that can rob this Honourable Court to exercise its power in any manner whatsoever”.
He further argued that “the parties are agreed that the Constitution is the fons et origo and the grundnorm, and supersedes any other legislation.”
The former Vice President also stated that while establishing the election tribunals to deal with election matters from Houses of Assembly, National Assembly and Governorship elections, the Constitution gave the jurisdiction to entertain disputes from presidential elections only to the Court of Appeal.
Citing Section 285 (6) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Atiku argued that the framers of the Constitution limited the application of the 180 days specifically to election tribunals, excluding the Court of Appeal.
While stating that it is in fact derogatory to refer to the Court of Appeal as a tribunal, he “submit that there is no constitutional limitation to rob this Honourable Court of the jurisdiction to exercise its express powers under Order 2, Rule 12 of the Supreme Court Rules 1985 to receive this vital and constitutionally important fresh evidence relating to qualification of a candidate to contest election to the exalted office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
Ruling on Thursday, on the motion for fresh deposition, the apex court in a judgement read on behalf of six other Justices of the panel by Justice Inyang Okoro, upheld the prayers of the respondents and held that the admissibility of fresh deposition was statute-barred and strongly an aberration to the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the Electoral Act 2022.
The court subsequently dismissed the request.
