Atiku Abubakar, the presidential nominee of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), has officially sought authorization from the Supreme Court to present what he terms as new evidence.
Through his legal representatives, Atiku has lodged a motion contending that the evidence he intends to submit to the highest court will corroborate his assertion that President Bola Tinubu furnished the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) with falsified documents to support his candidacy in the presidential election held on February 25.
The former Vice President argues that President Tinubu’s actions constitute both forgery and perjury, warranting his removal from office by the Supreme Court.
Atiku specifically requests the court’s endorsement to present Tinubu’s academic records, acquired from the Chicago State University (CSU) on October 2, 2023. This 32-page document was released by the CSU under the directive of Judge Nancy Maldonado of the District Court of Illinois, Eastern Division, Illinois, United States of America.
Atiku grounds his plea for permission to introduce fresh evidence against Tinubu on Order 2, Rule 12(1) of the Supreme Court Rules 1985, Section 137(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), and the inherent jurisdiction of the apex court as outlined in Section 6(6)(a) of the 1999 Constitution.
While the application is dated October 5, Atiku’s legal team officially completed the filing process on Friday night.
The PDP presidential candidate essentially implores the court for an order permitting him “to produce and for the court to receive fresh and additional evidence by way of deposition on oath from the Chicago State University for use in this appeal, specifically: the certified discovery deposition made by Caleb Westberg on behalf of Chicago State University on October 3, 2023, disavowing the certificate presented by the 2nd respondent, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, to the Independent National Electoral Commission.”
He also urges the apex court to “accept the said deposition as evidence as an exhibit in the resolution of this appeal,” and to additionally issue any appropriate orders that the apex court deems necessary in the circumstances of the case.
The application is supported by 20 specific grounds, including the contention that the proposed deposition, along with its accompanying documents, “would have a significant impact on the resolution of this appeal.”
