Breaking: Supreme Court rejects Atiku’s fresh evidence against Tinubu

The Supreme Court has dismissed the application by Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, to admit fresh evidence in his appeal against President Bola Tinubu for lack of jurisdiction.

The apex court said Atiku’s petition was a friendly joke. It insisted that the petition could not be granted.

Atiku had sought the leave of the apex court to present fresh evidence of forgery against Tinubu.

Atiku had filed a motion on notice at the Supreme Court, seeking two orders, including a leave to produce and for the court to receive additional evidence from CSU for use in the appeal.

Atiku had challenged the judgment of the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC), which dismissed his election petition against the outcome of the election which affirmed the election of President Bola Tinubu.

The motion on notice contained evidence disclaiming the certificate from CSU presented by President Tinubu to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for the 2023 presidential election.

However, the Supreme Court in a judgement delivered by Justice Inyang Okoro, rejected the motion on notice, stressing that fresh evidence could not be entertained and that the evidence was belated.

“An election tribunal shall determine its judgment within 180 days of filing of petition and therefore the court of appeal lost jurisdiction after 180 days

“The Supreme Court cannot activate its Section 22 of the Supreme Court Act after 180 days has lapsed at the lower court. I still wonder how the appellants intend to use the evidence in this appeal.

“The application to file fresh evidence runs foul of the provisions of the Electoral Act that prohibits the amendment of election petition of 21 days of the election petition.

“The Supreme court found as ridiculous the submission of Atiku Counsel that the 180-day rule does not apply to court of appeal sitting on the presidential election petition.

“The provision of the Constitution has spoken. There cannot be an addendum. Appeals are continuation of hearing on matters of the lower court,” Justice Okoro ruled.

READ ALSO: Supreme Court brings down curtain on 2023 presidential election disputes

The fresh evidence Atiku sought to tender was the academic records of Tinubu, which were handed over to him by the Chicago State University (CSU) on October 2.

The former Vice President had informed the court that the fresh evidence was crucial to his appeal, adding that it has inherent jurisdiction to entertain and decide on the application.

However, the Supreme Court said it has no jurisdiction to entertain the fresh evidence as the time limit allowed by the constitution has elapsed.

At the time of filing this report, the judgment was still ongoing.