The legal battle between former Nigerian presidential candidate President Bola Tinubu and his rival, Atiku Abubakar, has intensified as Tinubu seeks to block the release of his academic records.
Following a temporary suspension of a court order requiring the Chicago State University to provide these records to Atiku, Tinubu’s legal team has submitted a detailed objection, outlining two key arguments.
Firstly, Tinubu’s lawyers assert that his academic records hold little relevance in Nigerian courts, as past election proceedings have not been receptive to such discovery. They argue that Atiku’s pursuit of these records is based on a flawed assumption of their utility.
Secondly, Tinubu’s team contends that Atiku’s request is overly intrusive, enabling him to delve into Tinubu’s private and confidential educational history. They argue that this level of access amounts to a fishing expedition and could be exploited by political opponents to sow confusion and spread conspiracy theories.
The objection filed by Tinubu’s New York-based lawyer, Oluwole Afolabi, also raises concerns about the unlawful release of these documents in the past, which allowed political adversaries to use them against Tinubu.
Atiku initiated this legal battle by filing an application on August 2nd, seeking access to Tinubu’s academic records from Chicago State University. His goal was to use these documents to challenge the authenticity of Tinubu’s academic certificate submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) during the 2023 election. Atiku pointed to discrepancies between two purported diplomas from the university, both dated in 1979 but displaying differences in font, punctuation, seal, and signatures.
The initial court order, issued by Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Gilbert on September 19th, directed the university to release the requested documents to Atiku within two days. However, Tinubu’s legal team swiftly intervened, requesting the suspension of the order to prepare a more comprehensive challenge. This request was granted by District Judge Nancy Maldonado after an emergency hearing on September 21st.
In their objection filed on Monday, Tinubu’s lawyers argued that the magistrate judge’s decision to grant Atiku’s application overlooked the Nigerian Election Court’s previous decision, which indicated a lack of receptivity to such discovery. They also criticized the broad scope of the order, which included the release of “other educational documents” beyond the diploma initially submitted to INEC.
Tinubu’s legal team contends that allowing the discovery of documents beyond the diploma would be improper, given that these records were previously obtained illegally and used against him. They argue that Atiku’s pursuit of these records is driven more by curiosity than legitimate investigative interests.
As the legal battle unfolds, the U.S. court will face the task of weighing the arguments put forth by both parties and deciding whether Atiku should be granted access to Tinubu’s academic records.
