Justice Inyang Okoro is leading a seven-man panel of Justices of the Supreme Court, currently hearing the motion filed by former Vice President and Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the February 25, election, Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, seeking leave to file fresh evidence against President Bola Tinubu.
Atiku is seeking an order granting him leave “to produce and for the court to receive fresh and additional evidence by way of deposition on oath from the Chicago State University for use in this appeal to wit: the certified discovery deposition made by Caleb Westberg on behalf of Chicago State University on October 3, 2023, disclaiming the certificate presented by the 2nd respondent, Bola Ahmed Tinubu to the Independent National Electoral Commission.
Other Justices on the 7-man panel are Uwani Abaji, Lawal Garba, Ibrahim Saulawa, Adamu Jauro, Tijani Abubakar, and Emma Agim.
At Monday’s sitting, Chief Chris Uche SAN, appeared for the appellants; Abubakar Mahmoud SAN announced appearance for the Independent National Electoral Commission (1st Respondent); Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, represented the 2nd Respondent, President Bola Tinubu, while Chief Akin Olujimi SAN, announced legal representation for the All Progressives Congress (3rd Respondent).
By the motion seeking permission dated 5th October and filed on the 6th, Uche said, “We are praying for an order of leave to present fresh evidence on appeal pursuant to the powers of the Supreme Court, particularly the depositions on oath from the Chicago State University.
Adumbrating after moving the motion, Atiku’s lawyer told the panel that Tinubu, APC and INEC are opposing the application “essentially on technical grounds, not pleaded and coming late.
Uched argued that the motion was akin to jurisdictional issue not minding when it was filed, adding that the apex court should side-step technicality and grant the request.
Uche insisted that the motion is a constitutional issue, adding that the issue of 180 days cannot tie the hands of the apex court as they can hear the motion.
Reacting, the INEC lawyer said section 285 of the Constitution should be interpreted to accommodate the Court of Appeal as a Tribunal.
On his part, Olanipekun asked the court to dismiss the “unsual application for lacking in merit.
Tinubu’s Lawyer said the depositions Atiku is seeking to tender “are not admissible in USA. It is akin to depositions which we have here in Nigeria. The depositions were not done in a court.
More so, Olanipekun said the Court of Appeal is a Tribunal based on relevant constitutional provisions, adding that “the 180 days is like a rock of Gibraltor, it cannot be moved, it’s sacrosanct”.
Reacting also, the lawyer to the APC, asked the court to reject the motion seeking leave to bring additional fresh evidence.
Details soon…….
