The Supreme Court of Nigeria has dealt a substantial blow to Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The apex court has categorically dismissed Atiku’s application to introduce fresh evidence in his ongoing appeal against President Bola Tinubu, citing a lack of jurisdiction.
The Supreme Court, in a resolute decision, referred to Atiku’s petition as nothing short of a “friendly joke,” asserting that it fell outside the bounds of what could be granted. According to the court’s judgment, the case had been filed past the designated time limit and failed to substantiate allegations of forgery.
Atiku had fervently sought the court’s permission to present new evidence concerning Tinubu’s academic records, which he claimed to have received from Chicago State University (CSU) on October 2. He argued that this fresh evidence held substantial constitutional and democratic implications and, therefore, the Supreme Court should consider it.
However, the Supreme Court held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the introduction of this fresh evidence, as the constitutionally defined time frame had elapsed. This decision marks a significant setback for Atiku’s legal strategy in his quest to challenge the election results.
As of the time of this report, the judgment was still underway, and its final outcome was eagerly awaited by both political camps. The Supreme Court’s pronouncement not only shapes the trajectory of this election dispute but also sets a precedent for the role of timing and jurisdiction in similar cases in Nigeria’s legal landscape.