Atiku Seeks to Present New Evidence Against Tinubu in Supreme Court

In a determined effort to unseat President Bola Tinubu from office, the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, has submitted a request for leave to the Supreme Court to introduce what he describes as new evidence.

Atiku, through his legal team led by Chief Chris Uche, SAN, claims that this new evidence will substantiate his allegation that President Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) submitted forged documents to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in an attempt to qualify for the presidential election held on February 25.

The former Vice President contends that President Tinubu’s actions constitute both forgery and perjury, thus warranting his removal from office by the Supreme Court.

Specifically, Atiku is seeking the court’s permission to present academic records attributed to Tinubu, which he asserts were obtained from Chicago State University (CSU) on October 2, 2023. These documents, comprising 32 pages, were obtained through an order by Judge Nancy Maldonado of the District Court of Illinois, Eastern Division, Illinois, United States of America.

Atiku’s application for leave to file fresh evidence is grounded in Order 2, Rule 12(1) of the Supreme Court Rules 1985, Section 137(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), and the inherent jurisdiction of the apex court as delineated in section 6(6)(a) of the 1999 Constitution.

Although the application is dated October 5, Atiku’s legal team completed the filing process on a subsequent date.

In his application, Atiku requests the court to allow him to produce fresh evidence in the form of a deposition made on October 3, 2023, by Caleb Westberg on behalf of Chicago State University. This deposition disclaims the authenticity of the certificate presented by President Tinubu to INEC. Atiku also asks the court to admit this deposition as an exhibit in the resolution of the appeal.

The application is based on several grounds, including the argument that the deposition is crucial to the case’s resolution. Atiku’s legal team maintains that this evidence couldn’t have been obtained with reasonable diligence before the trial. They emphasize that the deposition, made after the trial at the lower court, is credible, unambiguous, and needs no further corroboration.

Atiku contends that the presentation of a forged certificate to INEC by a presidential candidate is a significant constitutional matter that the courts must address.

The original certified deposition from CSU has already been forwarded to the Supreme Court by letter, addressed to the Chief Registrar of the court. Additionally, the certificate presented by President Tinubu to INEC, which is central to Atiku’s case, was previously admitted in evidence by the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).

Atiku’s legal team is confident that the Supreme Court can grant their application for fresh evidence, emphasizing that it aligns with established legal precedents. They argue that the evidence sought would likely have a significant impact on the case and is credible.

The Supreme Court is yet to schedule a hearing date for this motion.