The Supreme Court has deferred its judgment on the appeal filed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, to challenge the election of President Bola Tinubu.
A seven-member panel of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Inyang Okoro, marked the case for judgment after all parties presented their briefs of argument.
During the proceedings, President Tinubu addressed the court, arguing against the admission of his certificate, which the Chicago State University (CSU) had released to Atiku Abubakar. Tinubu’s legal team, led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, contended that the foreign depositions relied on by Atiku to apply for the certificate to be admitted as evidence were conducted in a private law chamber in the United States, rendering them inadmissible in the U.S. courts.
They further argued that the necessary prerequisite conditions were not met to allow the apex court to admit the documents as evidence.
Tinubu’s legal team argued that the 180-day period allowed for the hearing of the petition that Atiku and his party filed to challenge the 2023 presidential election’s outcome had already elapsed.
They contended that it would be improper for the Supreme Court to admit fresh evidence at the appeal stage and that Atiku should have involved the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as an interested party in the U.S. proceedings.
Meanwhile, INEC, through its lawyer, Mr. Abubakar Mahmoud, SAN, urged the court to reject Atiku’s request to tender the CSU certificate, insisting that the time allowed for hearing the petition had expired.
Counsel to the All Progressives Congress (APC), Mr. Akinola Olujimi, SAN, argued that Atiku’s application lacked merit and should be dismissed. He contended that the law required an order of a Nigerian court before the CSU could be approached for the certificate and that this fundamental step was omitted.
Atiku and the PDP’s lawyer, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, argued that the Supreme Court, as the custodian of the Constitution, should overlook technicalities and do justice by admitting the fresh evidence. He maintained that the fact that the 180-day time limit had expired should not hinder the court.
Uche, SAN, also pointed out that the foreign depositions were made in chambers, as agreed upon by the parties and approved by the court. The evidence obtained confirmed that the certificate Tinubu presented to INEC did not originate from the University.
While Uche, SAN, urged the court to uphold the appeal and nullify the presidential election, all the respondents prayed the court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the verdict of the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal (PEPT).
Justice Okoro, who led the panel, emphasized the significant public importance of the case but expressed concern over the evidence’s potential connection to an alleged crime. He noted contradictory documents related to the CSU certificate, raising questions about how the discrepancies could be resolved.
The panel reserved its judgment for a later date, which will be communicated to the parties.