Former Vice President and candidate of the Peoples
Democratic Party, PDP, Atiku Abubakar, who is seeking to nullify the election
of President Bola Tinubu, on Friday, closed his case before the Presidential
Election Petition Court, PEPC, sitting in Abuja.
Atiku, who called a total of 27 witnesses and tendered
several documentary exhibits in evidence before the court, said his decision to
close his case was in view of the fact that he had exhausted the days that were
allocated for him to present his case against Tinubu.
“My lords, at this point in time, may we humbly inform your
lordships that this will be our last witness,” Atiku’s lead counsel, Chief
Chris 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 defence by the
Respondents till after the impending Sallah celebration.
Confirming the development, head of President Tinubu’s legal
team, Chief Wole 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 holidays
next week. We will therefore plead 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.
Following a no objection stance by counsel to the
Petitioners, the Justice Haruna Tsammani-led five-member panel, adjourned the
case till July 3 for INEC to open its defence to the petition.
The adjournment came after Atiku’s star witness, Mr. Mike
Enahoro-Ebah, was discharged from the box.
Enahoro-Ebah had in the course of his testimony, tendered before
the court, certified copies of academic qualifications of President Tinubu,
which was admitted in evidence and marked as an exhibit.
Equally admitted in evidence and marked as an exhibit by the
panel was Tinubu’s certificate of service from Mobile Oil Nigeria Plc, which
formed part of his work records, as well as a copy of his Guinean Passport.
Enahoro-Ebah told the court that he applied and obtained the
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.
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.
Mr. Enahoro-Ebah 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 nof until April 2023 that he received a copy
of the notorised judgement on criminal asset forfeiture proceedings that
involved the 2nd Respondent.
Besides, he 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.
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.
More so, the witness, said he had in 2022, instituted a
direct criminal complaints against Tinubu before a Chief Magistrate Court in
Abuja.
He told the court that the Chief Magistrate Court declined
jurisdiction to entertain the case.
Dissatisfied with the action of the court of the Magistrate,
the witness, said he wrote a petition to the Chief Judge of the Federal Capital
Territory.
A copy of the court process was admitted in evidence and
marked as an exhibit by the panel.
Asked if he inquired from the Guinean embassy, if the 2nd
Respondent (Tinubu) denounced his purported citizenship.
The witness, said: “My lord, I did not have to because the
former President of Guinea, Alpha Conde, admitted the issuance of the
passport.”
Following insistence by Tinubu’s lawyer, Chief Olanipekun,
SAN, 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.”
Asked if he was aware that the judgement from the US
District Court was not registered in Nigeria, the witness said he was only
aware that the verdict was “adequately notorised.”
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.
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 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 in evidence, the said public notice from
the Chicago State University which was tendered by Tinubu’s lawyer and marked
it as exhibit XX2.
When he 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, the witness said: “My lords there was a
plea to forfeit after his admission of 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 forgery of documents.”
Answering questions from counsel to the APC, Prince 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 finger print 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.”
Advertise on NigerianEye.com to reach thousands of our daily users
No comments
Post a Comment
Kindly drop a comment below.
(Comments are moderated. Clean comments will be approved immediately)
Advert Enquires - Reach out to us at NigerianEye@gmail.com