Tinubu allegedly presented forged certificates of primary and secondary schools to INEC in 1999, claims the plaintiffs
By Ishaya Ibrahim, News Editor
A lawsuit seeking to disqualify the All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential candidate, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, from contesting the February 25 presidential election, has been fixed for September 7.
Four chieftains of the APC filed the lawsuit challenging the eligibility of Tinubu from contesting the presidency of Nigeria over claims that he presented forged academic certificates.
The APC chieftains challenging Tinubu’s eligibility, claimed he presented the forged certificates to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) in 1999 while then seeking to become governor of Lagos State.
In a 33-paragraph affidavit in support of the suit deposed to by Ibiang Miko Ibiang, the plaintiffs claimed that Tinubu falsely swore to an affidavit in 1999 in which he claimed to have attended St. Paul Aroloya Children Home School, Ibadan -1958-64 and Government College, Ibadan -1965-68 and presented same to INEC.
They also claimed that after this turned out to be false, Tinubu allegedly tried to conceal this by refusing to provide any information whatsoever relating to his primary and Secondary schools in his INEC form for the 2023 election.
READ ALSO
Buhari’s nephew, a Rep member, dumps APC for PDP
Counsel to the Plaintiff, Goddy Uche, told the court that substituted service has become necessary because all attempts to serve the presidential candidate have proved abortive as he cannot be reached.
Justice Ahmed Mohammed who ruled on the case, ordered that the Court process be served on the National Secretariat of APC and that such service shall be deemed as having been properly served on Bola Tinubu.
He further adjourned the case to September 7. The plaintiffs had posed the following questions for determination;
Whether having regard to the provision of sections 1 (3); 4(1)and 2; 14(1),(2)(a), and (c)and 42(1)(a)and (b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999 (as amended), the provision of section 29(5)of the Electoral Act, 2022 as enacted by the 4th Defendant which modified the provision section 31(5) of the Electoral Act,2010(as amended) is not ultra vires the 4th Defendant and therefore unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect whatever.
Whether having regard to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case Modibbo Vs Usman (2020) 3 NWLR(PT.1712)470 and the provision of section 137(1)(j) the 3rd Defendant has not presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) the 1st Defendant and thereby disqualified from participating in the forthcoming 2023 Presidential General Election.
They also prayed that upon the favourable determination of the above questions, for the following reliefs:
A declaration of the Court that the provision of section 29(5) of the Electoral Act,2022 is ultra vires the 4th Defendant and unconstitutional, null, void, and of no effect whatsoever.
An order of the Court striking out/striking down the provision of section 29(5) of the Electoral Act 2022 from the Electoral Act and the body of extant laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria same being ultra vires the 4th and 5th Defendants, unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect whatsoever.
A declaration that the 3rd Defendant has presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission for the purpose of seeking to be elected into the office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
A declaration that the 3rd defendant stands disqualified from participating in the 2023 presidential election as a candidate of the 2nd Defendant has presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission for the purpose of seeking to be elected into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
An order disqualifying the 3rd Defendant from contesting or participating in the forthcoming 2023 Presidential general election as a candidate of the 2nd Defendant.