Atiku urges Supreme Court to admit Chicago papers on ‘a grave constitutional issue’
By Jeph Ajobaju, Chief Copy Editor
Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar has implored the Supreme Court to allow him to present fresh evidence to back his allegation President Bola Tinubu forged the certificate he submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
He reiterated presentation of forged documents by any candidate is a grave constitutional issue that should not be overlooked, according to his reply on point of law to Tinubu’s objection to the presentation of fresh evidence before the top court.
“Presenting forged documents by any candidate, especially by a candidate for the highest office in the land, is a very grave constitutional issue that must not be encouraged,” Atiku stressed.
Atiku had to take legal action in the United States to compel Chicago State University (CSU) to release Tinubu’s academic credentials after the first set of the same documents Atiku’s witness presented at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC) was rejected on the grounds the witness was not competent.
Tinubu strenuously fought in US courts to prevent the release of his academic credentials, claiming their release would cause him “severe and irreparable damage.” But the courts overruled his objection.
Based on the evidence in the Chicago papers Atiku and his legal team doubled down on the claim Tinubu forged the certificate he presented to the INEC, and filed them along with his appeal to the Supreme Court.
However, Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) rubbished the claim, describing as fruitless, Atiku’s journey to the US to shop for evidence.
His lawyers urged the Supreme Court to dismiss Atiku’s application seeking a leave to submit the CSU documents, claiming the attempt to submit them is “a crass abuse of court processes.”
__________________________________________________________________
Related articles:
Tinubu’s transcript shows why CSU didn’t issue him certificate, Atiku explains
CSU deposition shows why Tinubu forged his certificate
BBC did a paid job on Tinubu’s Chicago papers, Atiku and Obi shout back
__________________________________________________________________
Atiku asks top court not to filibuster genuine case through technicalities
Atiku in his response urged the top court to avoid technicalities and grant his application, insisting merit ought not to be determined or pronounced upon at the interlocutory stage, per reporting by The PUNCH.
He contended that refusing to allow him to tender the documents would amount to undue technicality.
Atiku’s lawyers argued in the filings that “the Supreme Court, as the apex court and indeed a policy court, has intervened time and again to do substantial justice in such matters of great constitutional importance, as it did in the case of Amaechi vs. INEC (2008) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1080) 227 and Obi vs. INEC (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1046) 565.
“The Supreme Court applied the principle of ubi jus ibi remedium to ensure substantial justice is done in such novel scenarios.
“The need to rebuff, eschew, and reject technicality and the duty of the court to ensure substantial justice is very germane in this matter, given the gravity of the constitutional issue involved in deciding whether a candidate for the highest office in the land, the office of President of the country, presented a forged certificate or not.
“Law is blind. It has no eyes. It cannot see. That explains why a statue of a woman with her eyes covered can be found in front of some high courts. On the contrary, justice is not blind. It has many eyes, it sees and sees very well.
“The aim of courts is to do substantial justice between the parties and any technicality that rears its ugly head to defeat the cause of justice will be rebuffed by the court.
Atiku stressed his stance is not whether Tinubu attended CSU or not but that he presented a forged certificate to the INEC.
“At the trial, a National Youth Service Corps [NYSC] certificate with serial number 173807 presented by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent was equally tendered by the appellants/applicants at the trial as ‘EXHIBIT PBD 1A’ with the name Tinubu Bola Adekunle, which is annexed herewith as EXHIBIT J,” Atiku added.
