Atiku Vs Tinubu: US Court Confirms Nigeria’s Supreme Court Can Consider New Evidence

In a recent ruling by Justice Nancy Maldonado of the United States Court, it has been confirmed that the Supreme Court of Nigeria possesses the mechanism to consider new evidence under “exceptional circumstances.” This significant decision comes in response to President Ahmed Tinubu’s objection to presenting documents from Chicago University as evidence in Alhaji Atiku Abubakar’s case. The US court emphasized that President Tinubu failed to provide any testimony or evidence indicating that the Court of Appeal’s decision somehow prevented the Supreme Court of Nigeria, in its discretion, from considering new arguments and evidence under “exceptional circumstances.” It was noted that President Tinubu, in fact, conceded this procedural mechanism before Judge Gilbert and did not dispute its existence. The court further clarified that President Tinubu’s suggestion that the evidence “cannot be considered under any circumstances” is unsupported by the record, highlighting that the US court cannot speculate on Nigerian law and procedure. However, it recognized the undisputed existence of a mechanism allowing Mr. Abubakar to potentially introduce the requested discovery into foreign proceedings. The decision regarding whether the Supreme Court of Nigeria will accept these documents or consider them in its decision lies within the jurisdiction of that court. The court stressed the undeniable significance of the discovery and the crucial issues at stake. It acknowledged that Chicago State University (CSU) is the sole source of the sought-after information concerning President Tinubu’s diploma and education, with no alternative means for Mr. Abubakar to access it. Based on Rule 26 considerations and the paramount importance of the discovery, the court supported the request for discovery. It affirmed that it would not obstruct the flow of discovery when it is within the possession of a US institution, especially given CSU’s readiness to provide it. The court concluded that Mr. Abubakar’s interest in the discovery outweighs President Tinubu’s privacy concerns. Considering these factors, the court found that the discretionary factors support granting Mr. Abubakar’s application. It also noted that President Tinubu did not specifically object to the scope of the discovery requests and that the requests were appropriately tailored to seek relevant information. In conclusion, the US court overruled President Tinubu’s objections and adopted Judge Gilbert’s ruling in full. Mr. Abubakar’s Application for discovery was granted. An expedited schedule was set for completion of discovery, aligning with the pending Supreme Court of Nigeria deadline. CSU was directed to produce relevant documents and complete the deposition, ensuring compliance with the established timeline.

US Court Mandates Chicago Varsity to Disclose Tinubu’s Academic Records to Atiku

A United States Court has issued a directive to the Chicago State University (CSU) regarding the release of President Bola Tinubu’s academic records to former Vice President Atiku Abubakar. The presiding judge, Nancy Maldonado, has dismissed Tinubu’s objections and set a two-day deadline for CSU to provide the requested documents to Atiku. Judge Maldonado upheld the earlier ruling made on September 20 by US Magistrate Judge Jeffery Gilbert, which had ordered CSU to release Tinubu’s academic records in response to Atiku’s request. The judge emphasized that Atiku, the presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), had the right to access these records. In her ruling, Judge Maldonado stated, “For the reasons stated in the Court’s accompanying Memorandum Opinion and Order, the Court overrules President Tinubu’s objections and adopts Judge Gilbert’s recommended decision in full. The Court, therefore, grants Mr. Abubakar’s application under 28 U.S.C. § 1782.” Furthermore, the court has set a timeline for CSU to comply with the directive. CSU is instructed to produce all relevant and non-privileged documents in response to specific requests by Atiku’s legal team by 12:00 p.m. (noon) CDT on Monday, October 2, 2023. Additionally, the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of CSU’s corporate designee must be completed by 5:00 p.m. CDT on Tuesday, October 3, 2023. Atiku’s request for Tinubu’s academic records stems from his ongoing legal challenge to the outcome of the February 25 presidential election in Nigeria. Atiku, the PDP candidate, has argued that the documents are essential in supporting his claim that Tinubu allegedly forged a certificate from CSU in 1979, which he submitted to Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for the 2023 presidential election. This court ruling represents a significant development in the legal proceedings surrounding the presidential election and the authenticity of Tinubu’s academic qualifications.

Atiku rejects Tribunal verdict, vows to pursue legal appeal

In a significant development following the judgment by the Presidential Election Petition Court on the 2023 presidential election, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar held a press conference to share his official reaction. Atiku, reknowned for his history of political legal battles, in a press conference held earlier today, addressed the world regarding Wednesday’s judgment, emphasizing his faith in the judiciary, referring to it as the “sanctuary of justice.” The former Vice President expressed his decision to challenge the outcome of the presidential election following the declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that the All Progressives Congress (APC) and its candidate were the winners. “My decision to go to court is anchored in my belief that the court is the sanctuary of justice. The journey of my political career holds so much to the courage and fearless decisions of our judiciary.” “The last presidential election in our country was heavily compromised by INEC and the judgment of the court as rendered by the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal yesterday, failed to restore confidence in our dreams of free and fair elections devoid of human manipulations,” Atiku said. According to Atiku, the court has a duty to address the issues arising from the last presidential election and to restore confidence in the electoral process. “My ultimate goal in this pursuit is to ensure that democracy is further strengthened through the principles and processes of fair hearing.” Though the judgment of the court yesterday is respected, it is a judgment that I refuse to accept. I refuse to accept the judgment because I believe that it is bereft of substantial justice,” he added. He expressed concerns about the management of the last presidential election by INEC, stating that it left behind unfavourable precedents and compromises to the transparency achieved through technology. He mentioned that the recent judgment failed to restore confidence in free and fair elections without human manipulations. He reiterated his ultimate goal in pursuing this legal battle, which is to strengthen democracy through the principles and processes of fair hearing. While he respected the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, he refused to accept it, believing it lacked substantial justice. Atiku announced that he had instructed his lawyers to activate his constitutionally guaranteed rights of appeal to the Supreme Court, the higher court. He expressed his conviction that elections in Nigeria should be free from manipulations and should reflect the wishes of the electorate. In conclusion, Atiku urged his supporters to remain steadfast, drawing inspiration from the late Shehu Yar’Adua’s teachings that losing a battle is less important than losing the war. He added that he remains committed to the cause of credible elections in Nigeria and expressed confidence in the ultimate victory of restoring confidence in the electoral system.

Presidential Tribunal to announce verdict Sept 6, okays live broadcast

Putting an end to two weeks of suspense, the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) has officially confirmed that it will deliver its judgment on Wednesday, September 6. This landmark decision comes after three petitions contesting the victory of Bola Ahmed Tinubu in the 2023 presidential election. The Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal, Umar Mohammed Bangari, disclosed this important date in Abuja on Monday, putting to rest the speculations that had been swirling around the case. Bangari assured that the court is taking every measure to ensure a smooth and trouble-free delivery of the judgment in response to the three petitions. These petitions were filed by Abubakar Atiku, the Presidential candidate of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP); Peter Obi, his counterpart from the Labour Party; and the Allied People Movement (APM) under the APC umbrella. In an effort to maintain order and security, Bangari mentioned that stringent security measures have been implemented. Access to the courtroom will be restricted, permitting only invited members of political parties and the general public to enter. This approach is intended to prevent overcrowding and potential security breaches. Furthermore, Bangari announced that interested television stations would be allowed to broadcast the proceedings live, without any associated costs to the court. However, to ensure security and crowd control, certain restrictions will be in place around the court premises. A notable decision by the court was to reserve judgment on the petitions submitted by the Allied Peoples Movement (APM) and Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party, scheduling them for delivery on the same day as Peter Obi’s Labour Party petition. Notably, last week, the court refuted the claims that it had set September 16 as the date for the judgment, clarifying the actual date as September 6.

Presidential Tribunal: Atiku, Obi, Tinubu to present final addresses

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) in Abuja is nearing the conclusion of its proceedings, with Atiku Abubakar of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and Mr. Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP) set to adopt their final written addresses on Tuesday. These addresses precede the judgment date for all petitions related to the February 25 presidential election, including the challenge against President Bola Tinubu’s victory. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) declared Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) as the winner of the election, with 8,794,726 votes, defeating Atiku Abubakar who secured 6,984,520 votes and Mr. Obi with 6,101,533 votes. Disputing the results, both Atiku and Obi filed separate petitions, claiming victory and challenging Tinubu’s eligibility to run for the presidency. The petitioners seek to have the court declare that President Tinubu did not obtain the majority of lawful votes and to withdraw his Certificate of Return. They are also calling for a fresh presidential election, excluding Tinubu, whom they contend was ineligible to participate in the first place. Obi presented 13 witnesses and various documentary exhibits, while Atiku produced 27 witnesses and additional evidence before the court. INEC and President Tinubu each had one witness in their defense, and the APC did not produce any witnesses. The Respondents, including INEC, President Tinubu, and APC, have all submitted written addresses urging the court to dismiss the petitions for lack of merit. They argue that the petitioners failed to prove their allegations beyond reasonable doubt, as required by the law. Atiku’s joint petition with the PDP (marked: CA/PEPC/05/2023) asserts that Tinubu’s declaration as the winner of the presidential election was invalid due to non-compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022, and contends that he was not duly elected by the majority of lawful votes. The proceedings continue as the nation awaits the judgment that will determine the outcome of the closely contested presidential election.

INEC closes defence in Atiku’s petition with one witness

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) called one witness that testified in the petition filed by the candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, challenging the outcome of the 2023 presidential election. At the resumed proceeding on Monday, INEC tendered four documentary exhibits in evidence, which include a letter dated July 6, 2022, which the Vice President, Kashim Shettima, wrote to notify it of his decision to withdraw as the candidate of the All Progressives Congress, APC, for the Borno Central Senatorial election. Led in evidence by INEC’s lead counsel, Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, the witness, Mr. Lawrence Bayode, who is a Deputy Director of ICT at the Commission, tendered the letter and its accompanying certification, which was admitted in evidence and marked as Exhibits RA-1 and RA-2. Under cross-examination by counsel to Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Chief Olanipekun, SAN, the witness, insisted that the presidential election held on February 25, was “free, fair, credible and conducted in substantial compliance with the Electoral Act.” The witness also told counsel to APC, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the witness said that the technical glitch that was experienced on Election Day did not affect the actual scores of all the presidential candidates, which he said remained intact. He further told the court that the results of the presidential election were not electronically collated, saying it was done manually. “INEC does not have an electronic collation system,” he insisted, adding that INEC had few days to the presidential poll, and announced that electronic transmission of results of the election would not be feasible. However, while being cross-examined by counsel to the Petitioners, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, the witness, told the court that the European Union, EU, Observation Mission was accredited by INEC to monitor the 2023 general elections. On if he was aware that the EU has released its final report on the election, the witness, said: “Yes I am aware, but I have not seen it.” When he was shown a certified copy of the EU’s report and asked to read from a portion of it, the Respondents raised objections. Though they opposed the admissibility of the report as part of the proof of evidence in the case, Justice Haruna Tsammani-led’s five-member panel of the court admitted it in evidence as Exhibit RA-6. The witness, read a paragraph in the report where the EU stated that 2023 was not “a transparent and inclusive election” as promised by the INEC. He also read a portion of the report that stated that “only 31% of results uploaded in I-REV was formally or mathematically correct.” However, he maintained that technological innovations that INEC introduced into the electoral process were to guarantee transparency and integrity of the results. Also, the lead counsel to Tinubu, informed the Presidential Election Petition Court, PEPC, its readiness to open his defence to petitions seeking to nullify his client’s election, on Tuesday. Tribunal admits EU final report, faulting Tinubu’s election. The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) Monday, admitted as exhibit, the final report of the European Union Election Observer Mission, which faulted the conduct and outcome of the 2023 presidential election that produced President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and others. The report tendered by the former Vice President and Presidential candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) in the February 25 presidential election, Atiku Abubakar was admitted as exhibit in spite of vehement objections by President Bola Tinubu, All Progressive Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). In the report, the EU election observer mission claimed that the presidential election did not show credibility, fairness, and transparency in the ways and manners it was conducted by INEC. The report tendered through INEC’s sole witness and Director of Information Technology (IT), Dr. Lawrence Bayode said only 31 percent of the presidential election result was uploaded into INEC’s result viewing portal. Before the admission of the report, Atiku through his lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche SAN had applied that cross-examination of the INEC’S witness must be kick-started by Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress APC in view of their common interests against Atiku’s petition. The application was however bluntly opposed by Tinubu and APC through their lead counsel, Wole Olanipekun SAN, and Prince Lateef Olasunkanmi Fagbemi SAN respectfully. However, the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led panel admitted it as evidence.

Tribunal: Fireworks resume July 3 as Atiku and Obi seek to dethrone Tinubu

The 2023 Presidential Elections may have come and gone, but the legal fireworks fanned by Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi continue to fiercely burn. Suffice it to say that it has been a topsy-turvy three weeks at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) as the aggrieved parties battled to drive home their case challenging the declaration of Ahmed Bola Tinubu as the winner of the said election. On May 8th, the presidential election petition kicked off with five petitions from different political parties which were later consolidated. In the buildup of the full-blown hearing of the petitions, there was mild drama as two aggrieved parties Action Alliance (AA) and the Action Peoples Party (APP) withdrew their petitions, during the pre-hearing sessions of the petitions. However, Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Alliance Peoples Movement (APM) continued with the quest to upturn the outcome of the presidential election.   The petitioners were given three weeks to prove their case, after the pre-election reports were delivered on 23rd May 2023, as time allocated for hearing, calling of witnesses and cross-examinations were stated for easy conduct of proceedings. On July 23rd, Mr Obi and LP closed their case after calling 13 witnesses as against the 50 witnesses registered in their pre-hearing schedule, amongst which they tendered documents, and the total number of registered voters and Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs) collected in 32 states in the lead up to the presidential polls to aid their case. All their witnesses who were party agents and INEC officials, submitted that accreditation of voters was seamless, but transmission of Presidential election results was difficult, adding that they were made to sign the forms EC8As under duress. According to the witnesses, all the Labour Party agents totalled 133,000 as against the 176,974 polling units across the country, and they insisted that Peter Obi should be declared winner because he had the most results which were not uploaded as promised by INEC. Peter Obi and the Labour Party also tendered a report through a subpoenaed witness, Claretta Ogar, who is a cloud engineer and architect and an employee of Amazon Web Services Incorporated, USA. According to the Star witness, the Amazon Web server that provided cloud services for INEC’s digital backbone for the presidential election did not experience any glitch that could have affected the e-transmission of results on February 25, 2023. The report specifically provides details on the health status of the Amazon Web server that provided cloud services for INEC’s digital backbone for the presidential election. The document, totaling six copies were admitted by the court amid objections by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Kashim Shettima and the All Progressive Congress (APC). Also, two subpoenaed witnesses of the Labour Party and Peter Obi, contradicted each other on the powers and responsibilities of the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA, as related to the February 25, 2023 general elections. Chebuike Ngwoke, a digital cyber-security expert, commissioned to do a cyber-security and risk analysis of the election by the Labour Party, told the court that the International System for Standardization, ISO Certification, is expected to be issued by the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA and to the Independent National Electoral Commission in line with the 2007 Act that established it.  However, another subpoenaed witness of Obi, Emmanuel Edet, a legal officer from NITDA contradicted the position that there was no provision in the NITDA Act that gave the agency that role when he was crossed examined by Wole Olanipekun, SAN, Counsel to Tinubu. On the part of Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), they had on the 21st of March filed their petitions challenging the emergence of President Bola Tinubu in the February 25 elections. Closing their case on Friday 23rd June, called a total of 27 witnesses as against 100 submitted in the pre-hearing schedule to prove their case, amongst other documents tendered. However, speaking to reporters, lead counsel to the Petitioners, Chief Chris Uche SAN, said that the documents tendered took the place of the remaining 73 witnesses. Some of the notable witnesses called were three Presiding Officers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) who told the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) that the refusal of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) to transmit the presidential election results on Election Day frustrated their jobs. The Officers, who were testifying on subpoena, admitted that the results of the Senate and the House of Representatives were transmitted unhindered and that the problems of technical glitches arose at the point of transmitting only the presidential poll results. The three witnesses are Janet Nuhu Turaki, Christopher Bulus Ardo and Victoria Sani who served as INEC’S Presiding Officers at Yobe, Bauchi and Katsina States, respectfully. Also among the testifiers was Hitler Uwala, who is a forensic Analyst and he tendered 7 volumes of reports based on the 110 BVAS machines inspected.  Under the evidence in chief, Uwala told the court that the results contained in the 110 BVAS machines he inspected were deleted. However, while under cross-examination by the INEC counsel, he admitted that he was not in Abuja when the elections were conducted and that nothing was wrong with the BVAS machine when he inspected them. He added that he didn’t interview any of the election presiding officers and does not know if anything was wrong with the BVAs machine on Election Day. INEC further told the court that the 110 BVAS machines inspected in the Federal Capital Territory constitute only 3.5% out of the 3163 devices allocated to Abuja and less than 0.06% of the total number of BVAS deployed across Nigeria. To verify the witness’ claims on deleting of results, INEC’s lawyer brought four BVAS devices for the witness to inspect but he refused saying it was professionally wrong to do that as the figures might have been tampered with. Uwala added that he can’t identify the BVAs machine given to him as

Broadcaster, Ijeoma Osamor testifies before Presidential Tribunal

A broadcast Journalist with DAAR Communications PLC, Ms. Ijeoma Osamor, on Friday testified in the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) holding in Abuja. Osamor, who anchors a programme in the Africa Independent Television (AIT) “Democracy Today” was subpoenaed as ‘the 7th witness (PW7) for Mr. Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP). Obi and LP are petitioners in the petition marked CA/PEPC/03/2023 challenging the election which brought President Bola Tinubu into power Respondents are Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) president Bola Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima and the All Progressives Congress (APC). Osamor when being cross-examined by APC counsel, Abiodun Owonikoko, SAN, said INEC Chairman, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu said the results of the Feb. 25 presidential election would be transmitted live. One of the grounds raised by the petitioners in support of their prayers to invalidate the return of the president, Bola Tinubu was that Yakubu reneged on his promise to upload the results sent to the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System to the INEC Results Viewing portal in real-time. However, video evidence tendered before the PEPC by the petitioners bordered around clips showing the INEC chairman at different times assuring Nigerians of the use of technology in the presidential election. The court, again admitted in evidence another flash drive and played it in the open court a clip of Mahmoud delivering a speech emphasizing the deployment of BVAS and IReV for the elections. When asked by Owonikoko if she was aware that a few days before the election, Yakubu in a press statement said the results will no longer be uploaded in real-time. She her news organisation is focused on live coverage of events and programmes. Owonikoko also raised the issue and cited a publication by The Tribune on Feb. 23 that election results would no longer be transmitted in real-time. Osamor said the Tribune publication could have been based on an interview with the reporter. The Tribune on Feb 23 published a story with the headline ‘We won’t transmit raw figures of election results’, INEC chairman. According to Tribune, Yakubu said that at a meeting with the leaders of the international election observers who visited him at the commission. However, the reporter insisted that while covering the beat, she was present during the said period at all press briefings and at the collation centre, particularly on the said day. She said that Yakubu did not make such a statement. Meanwhile, the five-member panel led by Justice Haruna Tsammani adjourned until Monday for the cross-examination of the witness and further hearing of the petition.

Tribunal: Atiku tenders statisticians’ reports against Tinubu

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) on Wednesday admitted as exhibits, three sets of reports prepared by a group of Statisticians on the electoral forms used during the last presidential election. Atiku’s Subpoened witness, PW21, a renowned Statistician, Samuel Oduntan made these reports available during his evidence-in-chief led by counsel to Atiku, Eyitayo Jegede SAN. Inspite of objections by the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC, Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress APC against the testimony of the witness, the Presiding Justice of the Court, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani admitted the three reports as exhibits. At Wednesday’s proceedings, former NBA President, Abubakar Mahmud SAN, Wole Olanipekun SAN and Lateef Fagbemi SAN conducted the case of INEC, Tinubu and APC respectfully. Besides opposing the admission of the documents, the three respondents also kicked against the bid to consider the reports as being read in the open court. Meanwhile, Justice Tsammani has fixed June 15 for further hearing of the petition especially the cross examination of the witness