Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the 2023 election, Atiku Abubakar, has asked the Supreme Court to let him present new evidence to support his allegation that President Bola Tinubu submitted a fake document to the Independent National Electoral Commission.
He said this was a serious constitutional matter that should not be ignored.
This was stated in Atiku’s response to Tinubu’s opposition to his request for leave to present new evidence before the highest court.
“Presenting forged documents by any candidate, especially by a candidate for the highest office in the land, is a very grave constitutional issue that must not be encouraged,” Atiku said.
Atiku had taken his legal fight against Tinubu to the US, where he obtained court orders to compel Chicago State University to release Tinubu’s academic records.
Based on the documents, Atiku and his lawyers argued that Tinubu submitted a fake document to INEC.
But the All Progressives Congress and Tinubu’s team dismissed the claim, saying Atiku’s trip to the US to look for evidence against Tinubu was futile.
Tinubu’s lawyer also argued that Tinubu’s academic records obtained in the US would not be accepted at the Supreme Court in Nigeria where Atiku is challenging Tinubu’s election victory.
Tinubu’s team urged the Supreme Court to reject Atiku’s application to submit the document. They called Atiku’s attempt to submit the document “a gross abuse of court processes.”
But in his reply on point of law, Atiku urged the court to disregard technicality and grant his request.
He said the issue of merit should not be decided or pronounced at this stage.
Atiku said denying him the opportunity to tender the document would amount to undue technicality.
“The Supreme Court, as the apex court and indeed a policy court, has intervened time and again to do substantial justice in such matters of great constitutional importance, as it did in the case of Amaechi vs. INEC (2008) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1080) 227 and Obi vs. INEC (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1046) 565. The Supreme Court applied the principle of ubi jus ibi remedium to ensure substantial justice is done in such novel scenarios.
“The need to rebuff, eschew, and reject technicality and the duty of the court to ensure substantial justice is very germane in this matter, given the gravity of the constitutional issue involved in deciding whether a candidate for the highest office in the land, the office of President of the country, presented a forged certificate or not.
“Law is blind. It has no eyes. It cannot see. That explains why a statue of a woman with her eyes covered can be found in front of some high courts. On the contrary, justice is not blind. It has many eyes, it sees and sees very well. The aim of courts is to do substantial justice between the parties and any technicality that rears its ugly head to defeat the cause of justice will be rebuffed by the court, “ Atiku’s court paper partly read
The former Vice President said his position was not whether Tinubu attended Chicago State University or not but that Tinubu allegedly submitted a fake certificate to INEC.
