By Emmanuel Enebeli
ASABA/Nigeria: The authenticity of the certificate submitted by Nigerian President Bola Tinubu to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) for the upcoming 2023 presidential election has come under scrutiny, as the Chicago State University (CSU) expressed uncertainty regarding its genuineness.
During a hearing held on Tuesday, September 12, Michael Hayes, counsel to the university, informed the court that CSU could not confirm whether the certificate presented by Tinubu to INEC was legitimate or forged. This stance contradicts CSU’s previous assertion that it had issued a certificate to Tinubu after his graduation in 1979.
Hayes stated during the hearing in Chicago, which commenced at approximately 1:30 p.m. local time and lasted several hours, that, “Is the diploma authentic, or is it a forgery? My client can’t answer yes to either of those questions.” The lawsuit in question was brought by Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party in the 2023 general election and Tinubu’s primary rival.
The CSU’s legal representative also noted that the university could not, if placed under oath, clarify “where and how” Tinubu obtained the certificate, stating, “My clients just don’t know.” This development appears to be a possible response from CSU after Tinubu previously attributed discrepancies in the certificates supposedly issued by the university to the school’s clerk.
Hayes was responding to the judge’s inquiry into the school’s ability to confirm under oath that Tinubu received the certificate he submitted to INEC in June 2022, as a prerequisite for his presidential candidacy. Submitting forged documents to INEC is prohibited by the Nigerian Constitution.
Hayes maintained that CSU records indicated Tinubu’s attendance at the institution but admitted that there were numerous contradictions that the university’s administrators would be unable to clarify under oath. These discrepancies included the date of June 22, 1977, as stated on Tinubu’s certificate, as well as errors in the document’s typography, font, header, and the name of the school’s president at the time the certificate was allegedly obtained.
Notably, on June 17, 2022, Tinubu submitted a certificate to INEC that purportedly dated back to 1979 and bore the signature of Elnora Daniel, who did not become a staff member of CSU until 1998—the same year Tinubu coincidentally contested the election for the governor of Lagos State. Ms. Daniels reportedly left the university in 2008 following a financial mismanagement scandal, 14 years before CSU issued another certificate in Tinubu’s name under subpoena from a Nigerian lawyer seeking information about Tinubu’s education at the institution.
These discrepancies, among others, prompted Atiku to file a lawsuit compelling CSU to produce records related to Tinubu and make its top officials available for deposition to authenticate the provided records.
Alexandre de Gramont, representing Atiku in court, explained that these documents and depositions were being sought for use in the Nigerian Supreme Court, where the final battle over Tinubu’s election was headed. Gramont cited that the Nigerian Court of Appeal had upheld Tinubu’s election on September 6, 2022, due to the panel’s lack of access to CSU’s position on the certificate’s authenticity. He further noted that the Supreme Court in Nigeria might consider admitting CSU’s position on the document under a special rule.
Gramont emphasized, “Your Honour, we don’t know whether the Nigerian Supreme Court would be receptive to the new evidence or not, but we just want to be able to present the new evidence to them from CSU. We already have them (the documents), what we are seeking is CSU’s authentication or their explanation for some of the discrepancies.”
Presiding Judge Jeffery Gilbert remarked that the court had consistently taken a liberal and broad view in granting similar requests under Section 1782, a statute permitting the release of documents and evidence located in the U.S. for use in foreign proceedings.
Tinubu’s legal representation, Christopher Carmichael, who participated via telephone conference, asserted that Atiku was engaging in a fishing expedition and contended that CSU’s prior statements affirming Tinubu’s graduation were sufficient. Carmichael argued against the need for further evidence or placing CSU’s officials under oath to address the authenticity of Tinubu’s certificate, claiming that it would only fuel online speculation because the Supreme Court would not accept new evidence, even if produced.
Consequently, Judge Gilbert indicated that he would require additional time for deliberation before ruling on the matter. He instructed all parties involved to review the records submitted to the court and make necessary updates in the interim. A date for a final ruling or additional hearing would be communicated to the concerned parties in due course.
