A Federal High Court Sitting in Abuja is scheduled to hear on September 7, the lawsuit seeking the disqualification of the Presidential candidate of the All Progressive Congress (APC), Bola Ahmed Tinubu, from contesting the election for allegedly presenting forged certificates.

Four chieftains of the APC who are the plaintiffs, asked the court to disqualify Tinubu participating in the forthcoming 2023 presidential election on the grounds of the information he supplied to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as the presidential candidate of the party.

In an affidavit in support of the suit overthrown by Ibiang Miko Ibiang, the plaintiffs stood their grounds that Tinubu had sworn falsely to an affidavit in 1999 where in he claimed to have attended St. Paul Aroloya Children Home School in Ibadan between 1958-1964 and Government College, Ibadan from 1965-1968, and presented to INEC

They claimed that after the truth was found out, Tinubu tried to conceal this by failing to provide any information whatsoever relating to his primary and Secondary schools in his INEC form for the 2023 election.

also, Counsel to the Plaintiff, Goddy Uche, told the court that substituted service has become necessary because all attempts to serve the presidential candidate have proved abortive as he cannot be reached.

Justice Ahmed Mohammed who ruled on the case, ordered that the Court process be served on the National Secretariat of APC and that such service shall be deemed as having been properly served on Bola Tinubu.

He further adjourned the case to September 7. The plaintiffs had posed the following questions for determination;

Whether having regard to the provision of sections 1 (3); 4(1)and 2; 14(1),(2)(a), and (c)and 42(1)(a)and (b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999 (as amended), the provision of section 29(5)of the Electoral Act, 2022 as enacted by the 4th Defendant which modified the provision section 31(5) of the Electoral Act,2010(as amended) is not ultra vires the 4th Defendant and therefore unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect whatever.

Whether having regard to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case Modibbo Vs Usman (2020) 3 NWLR(PT.1712)470 and the provision of section 137(1)(j) the 3rd Defendant has not presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) the 1st Defendant and thereby disqualified from participating in the forthcoming 2023 Presidential General Election.

They also prayed that upon the favourable determination of the above questions, for the following reliefs:

A declaration of the Court that the provision of section 29(5) of the Electoral Act,2022 is ultra vires the 4th Defendant and unconstitutional, null, void, and of no effect whatsoever.

An order of the Court striking out/striking down the provision of section 29(5) of the Electoral Act 2022 from the Electoral Act and the body of extant laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria same being ultra vires the 4th and 5th Defendants, unconstitutional, null, void and of no effect whatsoever.

A declaration that the 3rd Defendant has presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission for the purpose of seeking to be elected into the office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

A declaration that the 3rd defendant stands disqualified from participating in the 2023 presidential election as a candidate of the 2nd Defendant has presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission for the purpose of seeking to be elected into the office of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

An order disqualifying the 3rd Defendant from contesting or participating in the forthcoming 2023 Presidential general election as a candidate of the 2nd Defendant.

Source: Linda Ikeji Blog