• Lawyers, MBF, YCE, CSOs, others divided on forgery allegations, admissibility of new evidence at Supreme Court
From Fred Itua, Abuja Chukwudi Nweje, Lukman Olabiyi, Lagos and Seye Ojo, ibadan
The controversy over the authenticity of certificates obtained at the Chicago State University (CSU) in Illinois, United States by President Bola Tinubu in 1979 continued to rage yesterday, with supporters and opponents of the president taking totally different positions of the matter.
Lawyers, leaders of ethnic nationalities and civil society activists that spoke with Saturday Sun were sharply divided in their opinions. While some pitched their tents with the Presidential candidate of the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, insisting that the President’s certificates submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) were doctored, others asserted that President Tinubu’s records at the CSU were in order, noting that Atiku’s expedition in the school was a mere wild goose chase.
Meanwhile, leaders of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), are rallying round the president with a view to dousing the tension created by the certificate verification saga.
Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Atiku Abubakar, had accused Tinubu of allegedly forging the university certificate he submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
Atiku had approached a United States of America court, which had ordered Chicago State University to release details of Tinubu, especially his certificate.
Lawyers air conflicting views
Former Chairman, Nigeria Bar Association (NBA), Ikeja Branch, Dave Ajetomobi said Alhaji Atiku Abubakar’s legal effort on the certificate saga of President Tinubu was an exercise in futility.
In his opinion, whatever Atiku might have got from Chicago State University would not change anything at the Supreme Court.
He said: “First, the rules don’t allow for fresh evidence on appeal except in exceptional circumstances. Secondly, tendering such will not allow the case to be decided within 60 days allowed by the law because Tinubu’s lawyers must be given the opportunity to call evidence to contradict the fresh evidence. Thirdly, it’s going to be an effort in futility because though the CSU said the certificate was not issued by them because they don’t keep spare certificates or re-issue certificates, they have independent agents authorised to issue certificates on their behalf. Once the applicant is confirmed to have graduated from the university, the agents can issue certificates with their own format, not necessarily same with the university. Atiku has not disputed that it was not an authorised agent that issued Tinubu’s certificate. He and his crowd are just saying since the university said they didn’t issue the certificate it must have been forged, which is fallacious. Atiku can’t win now or in the next election in the court on this ground. It is already a lost battle.”
But a lawyer and rights activist, Gideon Okebu, was of a different view. He said in attempting to take President Tinubu’s CSU certificate to the Supreme Court, Atiku is going to have to rely on the principles of admitting fresh evidence at an appellate court.
Accordingly to him, there are principles for admitting fresh evidence at an appellate court, noting that the preconditions for such admission must co-exist in favour of an applicant, in order for an appellate court to admit such fresh evidence.
He stated the conditions as follows: “The evidence must be such that it could not have been obtained for use at trial with reasonable diligence; the evidence should be such that if admitted, would have an important effect on the whole case; the evidence must be such that is credible in the sense of being believed and it need not be controvertible. See UBA Plc v BTL Ind. Ltd (2005) 10NWLR (PT.933) 356 at 370-371.
“Whether this conditions co-exist vis-a-vis the facts of the case, is a question the Supreme Court must decide.”
On the issue of forgery, Okebu said the question of whether the allegation of certificate forgery is a pre-election matter is quite debatable, as Tinubu’s certificate was submitted to INEC in fulfilment of the conditions of being qualified to contest as President, which remains relevant before and during the tenure of his office.
“It is also essential to consider the implications of an allegation of forgery. An allegation of forgery is a criminal allegation, and even when made in an Election Petition dispute, the requirement of law is that it be proved beyond reasonable doubt. That is to say that all the ingredients of the offensive must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. This is a very high standard, one which is almost impossible to meet in a brief of argument, without the testimony of any witness and scrutiny of the document in a trial setting.
“The Supreme Court is highly unlikely to use Tinubu’s CSU certificate as a basis for upholding the petition filed by Alhaja Atiku Abubakar,” he said.
Another lawyer, Kabir Akingbolu, in his own analysis, said the former Vice President was just “catching cruise with his so-called new evidence.”
He shared the same thoughts with Ajetomobi on admissibility of new evidence by an appellate court.
Akingbolu said, in his view, Atiku was just entertaining his supporters with the new evidence, noting that the evidence couldn’t be tendered at the Supreme Court but could only be used for media trial.
Ethnic nationalities, CSOs, divided
Leaders of ethnic nationalities, geopolitical zones and civil society groups have also expressed divergent views as they weighed in on the raging controversy.
The Middle Belt Forum (MBF), National Democratic Coalition United States of America (NADECO-USA), Cultural Credibility Development Initiative (CCDI), Yoruba Council of Elders and Joint Action Front (JAF) expressed diverse views on the subject.
Publicity Secretary of MBF, Dr Dodo Isuwa also advised Atiku to take the new evidence at his disposal to court and stop engaging in media trial and addressing world press conferences.
He also cautioned against actions and statements that may appear as if he is accusing the judiciary of trying to thwart the course of justice.
He said: “In fact, these can be negative to the persons engaging in it, because it could seem that you are trying to make it look like the court is biased. Judges are human beings and when you start accusing them of bias when they have not done anything, they may then do that. As far as I am concerned, there is no need for all these media trial. If the court passes their judgement and you think it is biased, then you can go political.”
Abiodun Aremu, National Secretary of Joint Action Front said Tinubu represents “an erosion of human values in Nigeria” and urged him to resign.
He said: “We who live at this moment of fast erosion of human values in this Nigeria have a duty to rise to the challenge of confronting Tinubu to either shamefully resign or be disgraced out of office. He ceases to be a president of Nigeria the very moment the court in the USA exposed his background of fraudulent and duplicity identity. In the subsisting years to come, a generation would come to question all who live at this period in Nigeria on how we reacted to the label of a Tinubu as a fraudster in a foreign land and who equally emerged a president in the fraudulent electoral process in Nigeria. There is no other interpretation of fraud than fraud. Fraud is simply fraud.”
Lloyd F. Ukwu, Executive Director of NADECO – USA noted that the controversies surrounding Bola Tinubu’s academic history at Chicago State University have disgraced the entire nation of over 200 million people on the global stage.
He said: “Nigeria is in the throes of a deep international image, domestic and regional crisis-bleeding profusely on both national and international stages. It is a nation held in disdain presently at the international stage; its economy is in shambles, and its people are hungry for change.
“NADECO USA implores Mr Bola Ahmed Tinubu to liberate himself and the over 200 million Nigerians from the impending implosion. If Mr. Tinubu chooses to resign, perhaps Nigerians will find it in their hearts to forgive, and the secrecy legacy he leaves behind at CSU may no longer bear the stain of his political pursuits.”
Ide Goddy Uwazurike, President of the Cultural Credibility Development Initiative (CCDI), noted that the issue at stake is whether Tinubu presented a forged or genuine degree certificate to INEC.
He said: “It is not Atiku who presented the certificate. Peter Obi, who Tinubu supporters attacked viciously, is not a party to the Chicago hearing. The lawyer to Tinubu fought determinedly to suppress the release of the Chicago proceedings’ documents on the ground that they will damage the reputation of Tinubu. The report is out; the truth about the certificate is out. Chicago State University did not issue the degree certificate Tinubu presented to INEC. Any other discussion is an attempt to obfuscate the issue at hand.”
Uwazurike added: “The process of getting the Supreme Court to admit the evidence is tedious but not impossible. The final order of the Supreme Court is difficult to predict. Whether the Supreme Court removes Tinubu or not, the reputation of the presidency has been tainted.
In its submission, Yoruba Elders Council (YCE) said the university authorities have confirmed Tinubu’s attendance and graduation, rendering the doubts futile.
While acknowledging the ongoing legal proceedings regarding the issue, the YCE reminded the public that the Supreme Court is not a trial court or a court of new evidence.
In a call for unity, the YCE urged opposition parties to set aside their differences and collaborate with Tinubu for the betterment of Nigeria.
APC NWC rallies round President
However, while the battle still rages, members of APC National Working Committee (NWC), have continued to defend the President.
A member of NWC who spoke to Saturday Sun, said if party leaders had not stepped in, the opposition PDP would have decimated President Tinubu. He said members of the NWC have been expressing concerns on the lukewarm attitude of Tinubu’s team, who despite their clear roles, have not defended the President.
The APC chieftain said the party was worried that if the issues were not properly handled, especially in the media, the repercussions may be dire in the coming days. The member said series of meetings had been held by NWC members and other critical stakeholders of the party on how to address the issue, but lamented that the Presidency had been largely silent on the matter.
He said: “Members of NWC have been everywhere defending the President. Atiku’s men have been attacking and they’re well-coordinated. We’re worried that President Tinubu’s men have not been doing what they should be doing on this issue – that is, defending the president.
“Have you seen any of them on air or in the newspapers or online defending the President? They’ve left that job for APC. The battle is not over and we need to speak.”