President Bola Tinubu has stated that Atiku Abubakar and the PDP are attempting the impossible by seeking to introduce fresh evidence in their appeal at the Supreme Court.
Abubakar and the PDP are challenging Tinubu’s victory in the presidential election and the tribunal’s verdict upholding the outcome.
Abubakar had alleged discrepancies and forgeries in Tinubu’s academic records.
Although a U.S. court ordered Chicago State University to release Tinubu’s academic records, the president argues that the Supreme Court cannot consider these records.
He claims that the court cannot accept the written deposition of the CSU registrar, who was not a witness before the tribunal and whose statement was not activated through oral evidence as required by the Electoral Act 2022.
Tinubu said:
“Where a written deposition is not activated by oral examination of the deponent before the court, same will not be acted upon by a court”.
“It is not in doubt that the deponent of the deposition sought to be introduced as additional evidence was not orally examined at the lower court.
“The appellant has not made a case for the court to override the provision of Paragraph 41(1) of the First Schedule to the Electoral Act or referred to any law permitting the use of the deposition outside the confines of Paragraph 41(1) of the 1st Schedule.
“Appellants are attempting the impossible – thus, they have not stated whether the evidence is documentary or oral evidence because it fits into neither.”
The president said “the new document/deposition was neither pleaded nor listed at the lower court”.
“Even in regular civil proceedings, the court will still be required to fall back to originating processes in assessing the extent of its powers,” he said.
“None of the seven issues for determination presented by the appellants has any proximity to the disqualification of the respondents on the ground of forgery of any certificate whatsoever.
“Equally, there is no relief in the petition, seeking the disqualification of the respondent on the ground of forgery.”
He maintained that the Supreme Court cannot admit the deposition made by the Chicago State University (CSU) registrar and an additional document (marked Exhibits C and D).
He argues that the deposition was not made before a court but in the office of Atiku Abubakar’s lawyer.
Tinubu claimed:
“The purported deposition was made, not before a court, but before a shorthand reporter, in a law office of the 1st appellant’s (Abubakar) counsel”.
“He described the evidence as “hearsay” adding that “it is of no evidential value in the absence of the alleged deponent, Caleb Westerberg.”
Tinubu also raised the issue of fair hearing, stating that if the fresh evidence is accepted, the respondents will have no opportunity to file a response to it.
“A person who alleges that his right to fair hearing is being or likely to be breached does not need to prove any special damage,” he said.
President Bola Tinubu has strongly objected to the application by Atiku Abubakar and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to introduce fresh evidence in their appeal.
He contends that the application is untimely and without legal basis, intended only to harass and annoy him, and that it doesn’t conform to the law.
“From the foregoing, it is safe to submit that this application is a crass abuse of the processes of this honourable court,” he added.
“In conclusion, and for the reasons and arguments advanced in this address, we urge the Supreme Court to dismiss this application.”
