Tinubu Certificate Saga: Court Instructs Atiku To Prove Alleged Forgery Beyond A Reasonable Doubt

Atiku Abubakar and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu 

Atiku is instructed by the court to prove the fabrication of Tinubu's certificate beyond a reasonable doubt

Justice John Okoro, the panel's chairperson, stated on Monday that Atiku Abubakar, the standard-bearer for the People's Democratic Party in the February presidential election, must prove the certificate forgery accusation made against the former governor of Lagos State beyond a reasonable doubt.

During the hearing of the election petition appeals submitted by Atiku and Peter Obi of the Labour Party, Okoro issued the warning.

He made this after Atiku's main attorney, Chris Uche, SAN, asked the court to accept the petitioners' new evidence in a submission.

Even if the problem is of a criminal character, Justice Okoro stated that it must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

He noticed that there were two letters from Chicago State University that disagreed with each other.

He said that one of the letters validated and the other rejected the President's certificate.

He said, "This is a criminal matter that has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. There are two conflicting letters from the CSU: one authenticating the president's certificate and another discrediting it."

Justice Emmanuel Agim, a different panelist, noted that the deposition Atiku wanted to provide as evidence was conducted outside of the courtroom, at Atiku's attorney's office.

"I expected the college to write disclaiming the documents in dispute. Does a stenographer have the legal authority to administer oaths? We are dealing with a matter that touches on national interest," he noted.

However, Uche asserted that there was no disagreement regarding the fact that the depositions were conducted with Tinubu's US attorneys present.

Akin Olujinmi, SAN, the attorney for the All Progressives Congress, argued before the court that Atiku shouldn't be permitted to submit any documents that weren't already submitted to the tribunal.

He said, "You cannot smuggle in a document into the Supreme Court without first tendering the same at the trial court. The appeal is misconceived and lacks merit. It should be outright dismissed."