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.

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.

Alleged $460,000 Fraud: No evidence of trial, conviction against Tinubu – Tribunal rules

*Says Tinubu ’eminently’ qualified The Presidential Election Petition Court has ruled against allegations of fraud and drug allegations leveled against President Bola Tinubu by the presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Mr Peter Obi. The former governor of Anambra State and his party, claimed Tinubu was made to forfeit the sum of $460,000 to the US over alleged complicity in drug related offences in the early 90s. The Petitioners, were among other things alleged that by virtue of a forfeiture order against Tinubu by a United States District Court, his name ought not to be on the ballot. However, the court in it’s judgment  held that the Petitioners failed to substantiate the above mentioned allegation, consequently, it held that the respondent was eminently qualified to contest the election. Justice Tsunami held that Obi failed to prove that Tinubu was found guilty of any offence involving any act of dishonesty, adding that evidence before the court showed that the forfeiture order against Tinubu was in a civil, an allegation against a bank and not criminal matter. The five-man panel held that Tinubu was neither arraigned nor convicted in the US over any alleged crime to warrant his disqualification. “The Petitioners failed to prove that Tinubu went through any criminal trial, any form of sentences imposed on him. No record of any form of criminal arrest recorded in the USA.  “A general search was conducted and there was no records of any criminal charges against Tinubu. “The result of the search were negative of any criminal charge arrest and conviction.”  The court noted that documents tendered by the respondents confirmed that he was given a clean bill of health after enquiry from Nigeria. Beside, the tribunal held that under Section 269(1&2) such documents must be given under the hand Police official and must be accompanied with a certificate showing that the police officer has powers to sign such documents. Justice Tsunami further held that even if Tinubu were convicted for the alleged offence, for him to be disqualified from the 2023 election, the purported conviction must take place within 10 years to the election. On the Obi’s claim that the  results of the election were not transmitted real time to the INEC’s Results Viewing (IReV) portals,  the court held there is no where in the Electoral Act, that says election must be electronically transmitted for collation. It maintained that Sections 14&18 of the Electoral Act provides for the use of the Bi-modal Verification Accreditation System (BVAS) for the purpose of accreditation of voters, but ” IReV is not a collation system”. Therefore, it dismissed the claim of not compliance with the Electoral Act, 2022. “It should be noted as decided by this court previously, the BVAS is to transmit results to IREV. The IREV is not a collation system/center,” the court held . The court also held that the testimonies of 10 out of 13 witnesses called by Obi and LP were worthless, adding that no witness can give evidence in chief if his statement on oath is not properly before the court . “By combined provisions of section 285 of the Nigeria Constitution as amended and paragraph 14(1) and 14 of the schedule of the Electoral Act, the Petitioner cannot be allowed to file and use witness statement filed outside 21 days”.

INEC dramatically ends defence against Obi, LP with one witness 

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) on Tuesday dramatically terminated its own defence in Peter Obi’s petition against them, after calling one witness and tendering four documents. INEC had through its counsel Abubakar Mahmoud SAN, suddenly announced the closure of its defense, calling one witness against the three registered with the Presidential Election Petition Court at the pre-hearing section. In his evidence-in-chief, the witness, Dr Lawrence Bayode, admitted that INEC suffered glitches during the presidential election but maintained that the glitches did not in any way affect the conduct of the election, collation of results, and declaration of final results. On the allegations of blurred result sheets on INEC’S portal, the Deputy Director of Information and Communication said that clear result sheets can still be obtained on request by those in need of them. Sequel to INEC’s closing of its defence, Tinubu’s lead counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, told the Court that his client is fully ready to kick-start his defence against Mr. Peter Obi and the Labour Party on July 5. Olanipekun maintained that Tinubu is ready with his witnesses and documents to justify his victory in the presidential election. Meanwhile, further hearing in the petition has been shifted to July 5 by the Court.

Tribunal admits EU’s final report faulting Tinubu’s victory

The Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) on Monday admitted as an 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 as winners. The report tendered by the former Vice President and Presidential candidate of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) Atiku Abubakar was admitted as an exhibit in spite of vehement objections by President Bola Tinubu, the 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 results were 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.