The Presidential Election Petitions Court, PEC, sitting in Abuja, yesterday (Friday), admitted in evidence, certified copies of the academic qualifications of President Bola Tinubu.
Equally admitted in evidence and marked as an exhibit by the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel, was Tinubu’s certificate of service from Mobil Oil Nigeria Plc, which formed part of his work records, as well as a copy of his alleged Guinean Passport.
The documents were tendered before the court by a human rights activist and public interest litigator, Mr Mike Enahoro-Ebah, who appeared as a star witness in the petition the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Mr Atiku Abubakar, filed to nullify the outcome of the presidential election that held on February 25.
Enahoro-Ebah, who is the 27th witness in the matter, told the court that he applied and obtained Form EC9, which contained the affidavit of personal particulars, which Tinubu submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, in aid of his qualifications to contest the presidential election.
He told the court that his lawyer in the United States of America, USA, also wrote to various schools that the 2nd Respondent, Tinubu, claimed to have attended and obtained more information about him.
Led in evidence by Atiku’s lead counsel, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, the witness, told the court that among the documents he obtained from the USA, included Tinubu’s purported certificate from Chicago State University, which he said belonged to a female.
Also tendered before the court by the witness, was a transcript that was issued in 1977 by South West College, which he said equally established that the Tinubu that attended Chicago State University was a female.
The witness told the court that whereas the forwarding letter from his lawyer in the USA, which contained Tinubu’s details, came on November 1, 2022, however, it was not until April 2023 that he received a copy of the notorized judgement on criminal asset forfeiture proceedings in a drug related case that involved the 2nd Respondent.
Besides, the witness told the court that documents he obtained from INEC showed that the National Youth Service Corps, NYSC, certificate that Tinubu submitted in aid of his qualifications, bore the name, Adekunle.
Meanwhile, despite stiff objections from the INEC, President Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress, APC, who are Respondents in the matter, the court, admitted all the documents in evidence and marked them as Exhibits PDE-1 to PDE-5.
While being cross-examined by President Tinubu’s lead counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, the witness, said he was subpoenaed to appear before the court with some listed documents, by Atiku and the PDP.
He said the documents the Petitioners requested for, included the certificate that Tinubu said he obtained from the Chicago State University in the USA.
The PW-27 said he had in 2022, instituted a direct criminal complaint against President Tinubu before a Chief Magistrate Court in Abuja.
He told the court that the Chief Magistrate Court however declined jurisdiction to entertain the case.
According to him, dissatisfied with the action of the Magistrate, he wrote a petition that is still pending before the Chief Judge of the Federal Capital Territory.
A copy of the Magistrate court process was admitted in evidence and marked as an exhibit by the panel.
Asked if he inquired from the Guinean embassy if President Tinubu denounced his purported citizenship of the country, the witness, said: “My lord, I did not have to because the former President of Guinea, Alpha Conde, admitted the issuance of the passport.”
However, following insistence by Tinubu’s lawyer that the said passport that was tendered in evidence, expired in 2020, the witness, said: “My lords, the data page indicated that it expired, but citizenship does not expire.”
When the witness was asked if he was aware that the judgement from the US District Court was not registered in Nigeria, he said he was only aware that the verdict was “adequately notorized.”
The witness said he was not aware of any letter the US Consulate in Nigeria wrote to the Inspector General of Police on February 4, 2003, stating that there was no warrant of conviction against Tinubu in the USA with respect to the drug-related case.
Asked if he was aware that the Chicago State University had on June 27, 2022, issued a public notice, where it stated that the 2nd Defendant not only attended the school but graduated with an honours degree, the witness, said he was not aware of such letter, insisting that his case at the Magistrate court bordered on forgery.
The panel admitted the said public notice from the Chicago State University, in evidence after it was tendered by Tinubu’s lawyer, and marked it as exhibit XX2.
When the witness was shown the document from the US Court which he tendered and asked to confirm to the court if there was an arraignment, plea or trial that involved giving of evidence, he said: “My lords, there was a plea to forfeit money after he admitted guilt. But no conviction.”
Asked if as a lawyer, he would be happy to be scandalized by anyone, the witness replied: “Because I don’t want to be scandalized, that is why I will not be involved in the forgery of documents.”
Likewise, answering questions from counsel to the APC, Prince Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, the witness admitted that the said forfeiture judgement from the US had no certificate signed by a police officer but that of a licensed detective.
He said there was equally no fingerprint or picture on the court document.
The witness, who told the court that he is not a member of the APC, added, “My lords, I am a member of the Obidient movement.”
Asked if he was unhappy that his preferred presidential candidate lost the election, the witness, said: “By the temporary result that was announced by INEC, there was a presumption that my candidate lost the election. It was not a pleasing outcome,” he added.
Earlier in the proceeding, the Petitioners tendered in evidence, polling unit results from six states of the federation which were recorded in INEC’s Form EC8A.
The certified copies of the results, which the panel admitted in evidence, were from 25 Local Government Areas in Delta State, 13 LGAs in Ebonyi, 18 LGAs in Edo, 17 LGAs in Enugu and 23 LGAs in Kogi.
All the Respondents challenged the admissibility of all the documents that were tendered by the Petitioners, saying they would adduce reasons for their objections in their final written address.
Meantime, shortly after 27, the witness was discharged from the box, and the Petitioners announced their decision to close their case.
“My lords, at this point in time, may we humbly inform your lordships that this will be our last witness,” Atiku’s lead counsel, Uche, SAN, told the court.
Continuing, Uche, SAN, said: “Having exhausted the days allocated to us, pursuant to the pre-hearing report and Paragraph 46(5) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act, 2022, we most humbly apply the formally close the case for the petitioners.”
On its part, the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, through its lawyer, Mr. Kemi Pinhero, SAN, told the court that all the parties earlier met and agreed to defer the opening of the defence by the Respondents till after the impending Sallah celebration.
Confirming the development, Tinubu’s lawyer, Chief Olanipekun, SAN, begged the court to allow the Respondents, starting with INEC, to open their defence to Atiku’s petition, from July 3.
“My lords, all of us took into consideration some salient factors, especially the fact that some of us will love to travel to celebrate with our families and loved ones.
“Moreover, there is likely to be a two days public holiday next week. We will therefore plead with your lordships to adjourn the case till after the Sallah celebration.
“We also want to assure your lordships that on our part, we will not exceed the days allotted to us.
“We will start and close out case the same week,” Olanipekun, SAN, added.
Following a no objection stance by counsel to the Petitioners, Justice Haruna Tsammani-led’s five-member panel, adjourned the case till July 3 for INEC to open its defence to the petition.
Atiku, who came second in the presidential election and his party, are among other things, praying the court to withdraw the Certificate of Return that was earlier issued to President Tinubu by INEC.
He insisted that President Tinubu “demonstrated inconsistency as to his actual date of birth, secondary schools he attended (Government College Ibadan); his State of origin, gender, actual name; certificates evidencing Universities attended (Chicago State University).”
According to the petitioners, “The 2nd Respondent did not disclose to the 1st Respondent (INEC) his voluntary acquisition of the citizenship of the Republic of Guinea with Guinean Passport No. D00001551, in addition to his Nigerian citizenship. The 2nd Respondent is hereby given the notice to produce the original copies of his said two passports,” they added.
The petitioners equally challenged Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the presidential election, alleging that he was previously indicted and fined the sum of $460,000.00 by the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, in Case No: 93C 4483, for an offence involving dishonesty and drug trafficking.
Vanguard
