Headlines
Prove Tinubu’s Certificate Forgery Allegation Beyond Reasonable Doubt, S’Court Tells Atiku
The Chairman of the Supreme Court panel hearing the appeals against the election of President Bola Tinubu, Justice John Okoro, said on Monday that the Peoples Democratic Party standard bearer in the February presidential election, Atiku Abubakar, must prove the allegation of certificate forgery levelled against the ex-Lagos State governor beyond reasonable doubt.
Okoro handed down the admonition during the hearing of the election petition appeals filed by Atiku and Peter Obi of the Labour Party.
He stated this following the submission of Atiku’s lead counsel, Chris Uche, SAN, urging the court to admit the fresh evidence brought by the petitioners.
In his bid to nullify Tinubu’s victory and prove the allegation that he was not qualified to contest the presidential poll, Atiku had prayed to an Illinois Chicago district court to order the Chicago State University to release the President’s academic records.
The former vice-president had accused Tinubu of falsifying the CSU diploma of Bachelor of Science in Business Administration awarded in 1979 that he submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission.
He demanded a copy of any diploma issued by CSU in 1979, a copy of the diploma the CSU gave to Tinubu in 1979, and copies of diplomas with the same font, seal, signatures, and wording awarded to other students that are similar to what CSU awarded to him in 1979.
Atiku’s application was opposed by Tinubu’s lawyers, citing privacy concerns even as they conceded that only the certificate should be released and not other privileged records.
Academic record
But the United States court ordered the release of the ex-Lagos State governor’s academic records which Atiku filed in support of his election petition appeal at the Supreme Court.
Addressing the apex court on Monday, Uche insisted that the issue of Tinubu’s academic records was a weighty matter and urged the Supreme Court to admit it as fresh evidence.
The senior lawyer said, “The issue involving Tinubu’s certificate is a weighty, grave, and constitutional one, which the Supreme Court should admit. I urge the court to admit the fresh evidence of President Tinubu’s academic records from CSU presented by Atiku.
“The court should take a look at Tinubu’s records and reach a decision devoid of technicality. As a policy court, the court has a duty to look at it and should side-step technicalities. ”
Atiku’s lead counsel also said the issue of 180 days should not tie the hands of the court.
But Justice Okoro, while describing the matter as criminal in nature, said it must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
He observed that there were two conflicting letters from Chicago State University.
According to him, one of the letters authenticated the President’s certificate and the other discredited it.
He said, “This is a criminal matter that has to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. There are two conflicting letters from the CSU: one authenticating the president’s certificate and another discrediting it.”
Another panel member, Justice Emmanuel Agim observed that the deposition Atiku was seeking to tender as evidence was done in the chambers of Atiku’s lawyer and not in the courtroom.
“I expected the college to write disclaiming the documents in dispute. Does a stenographer have the legal authority to administer oaths? We are dealing with a matter that touches on national interest,’’ he noted.
But Uche argued that the depositions were done in the presence of Tinubu’s US lawyers, adding that there was no dispute about it.
The counsel to the All Progressives Congress, Akin Olujinmi, SAN, told the court that Atiku should not be allowed to bring in documents not presented at the tribunal.
He said, “You cannot smuggle in a document into the Supreme Court without first tendering the same at the trial court. The appeal is misconceived and lacks merit. It should be outright dismissed.”
In his response to Uche’s arguments, the lawyer to the President, Wole Olanipekun, SAN, similarly urged the court not to admit the fresh documents, adding that INEC was not a party to it.
“The depositions are not admissible in the USA. It is akin to deposition which we have in Nigeria. The deposition was not done in court and INEC was not a party to it. The deposition must be adopted by the individual that deposed to it before it can be admitted as evidence before the court,“ he reasoned.
He also said the 180 days stipulated for the conclusion of election petition cases “is like a rock of Gibraltar, it cannot be moved.’’
INEC’s lawyer, Abubakar Mahmoud, asked the court to interpret section 285 of the constitution and also urged the court to dismiss the appeal.
The Punch
An Abuja High Court has cleared the way for the implementation of Nigeria’s new tax regime scheduled to commence on January 1, 2026, dismissing a suit seeking to halt the programme.
The ruling gives the Federal government, the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) and the National Assembly full legal backing to proceed with the take-off of the new tax laws.
The suit was filed by the Incorporated Trustees of African Initiative for Abuse of Public Trustees, which dragged the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the President, the Attorney-General of the Federation, the President of the Senate, Speaker of the House of Representatives and the National Assembly before the court over alleged discrepancies in the recently enacted tax laws.
In an ex-parte motion, the plaintiff sought an interim injunction restraining the Federal Government, FIRS, the National Assembly and related agencies from implementing or enforcing the provisions of the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025; Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025; Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025; and the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act, 2025, pending the determination of the substantive suit.
The group also asked the court to restrain the President from implementing the laws in any part of the federation pending the hearing of its motion on notice.
However, in a ruling delivered on Tuesday, Justice Kawu struck out the application, holding that it lacked merit and failed to establish sufficient legal grounds to warrant the grant of the reliefs sought.
The court ruled that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate how the implementation of the new tax laws would occasion irreparable harm or violate any provision of the Constitution, stressing that matters of fiscal policy and economic reforms fall squarely within the powers of government.
Justice Kawu further held that once a law has been duly enacted and gazetted, any alleged errors or controversies can only be addressed through legislative amendment or a substantive court order, noting that disagreements over tax laws cannot stop the implementation of an existing law.
Consequently, the court affirmed that there was no legal impediment to the commencement of the new tax regime and directed that implementation should proceed as scheduled from January 1, 2026.
The new tax regime is anchored on four landmark tax reform bills signed into law in 2025 as part of the Federal Government’s broader fiscal and economic reform agenda aimed at boosting revenue, simplifying the tax system and reducing leakages.
The laws — the Nigeria Tax Act, 2025, Nigeria Tax Administration Act, 2025, Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2025, and the Joint Revenue Board of Nigeria (Establishment) Act, 2025 — consolidate and replace several existing tax statutes, including laws governing companies income tax, personal income tax, value added tax, capital gains tax and stamp duties.
Key elements of the reforms include the harmonisation of multiple taxes into a more streamlined framework, expansion of the tax base, protection for low-income earners and small businesses, and the introduction of modern, technology-driven tax administration systems such as digital filing and electronic compliance monitoring.
The reforms also provide for the restructuring of federal tax administration, including the creation of the Nigeria Revenue Service, to strengthen efficiency, coordination and revenue collection across government levels.
While the Federal government has described the reforms as critical to stabilising public finances and funding infrastructure and social services, the laws have generated intense public debate, with some civil society groups and political actors alleging discrepancies between the versions passed by the National Assembly and those later gazetted.
These concerns sparked calls for suspension, re-gazetting and legal action, culminating in the suit dismissed by the Abuja High Court.
Reacting to the judgment, stakeholders described the ruling as a major boost for the reforms, saying it has removed all legal obstacles that could have delayed the implementation of the new tax framework.
Former governor of Anambra State, presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in the 2023 election, Mr. Peter Obi, has officially defected to the coalition-backed African Democratic Congress (ADC).
Obi announced the decision on Tuesday at an event held at the Nike Lake Resort, Enugu.
“We are ending this year with the hope that in 2026 we will begin a rescue journey,” Obi said.
The National Chairman of the ADC, David Mark, was among the attendees.
United States Representative Riley Moors has said further military strikes against Islamic State-linked militants in Nigeria could follow recent operations ordered by President Donald Trump, describing the actions as aimed at improving security and protecting Christian communities facing violence.
Moore made the remarks during a televised interview in which he addressed U.S. military strikes carried out on Christmas Day against militant targets in North-west Nigeria.
The strikes were conducted in coordination with the Nigerian government, according to U.S. and Nigerian officials.
“President Trump is not trying to bring war to Nigeria, he’s bringing peace and security to Nigeria and to the thousands of Christians who face horrific violence and death,” Moore said.
He said the Christmas Day strikes against Islamic State affiliates had provided hope to Christians in Nigeria, particularly in areas affected by repeated attacks during past festive periods.
According to U.S. authorities, the strikes targeted camps used by Islamic State-linked groups operating in parts of north-west Nigeria.
Nigerian officials confirmed that the operation was carried out with intelligence support from Nigerian security agencies as part of ongoing counter-terrorism cooperation between both countries.
The United States Africa Command said the operation was intended to degrade the operational capacity of extremist groups responsible for attacks on civilians and security forces.
Nigerian authorities have described the targeted groups as a threat to national security, noting their involvement in killings, kidnappings and raids on rural communities.
Moore said the strikes marked a shift from previous years in which attacks were carried out against civilians during the Christmas period. He said the U.S. administration was focused on preventing further violence by targeting militant groups before they could launch attacks.
U.S. officials have said the military action was carried out with the consent of the Nigerian government and formed part of broader security cooperation between the two countries. Nigeria has received intelligence, training and logistical support from international partners as it seeks to contain militant activity.
Moore had previously called for stronger international attention to attacks on Christian communities in Nigeria and has urged continued U.S. engagement in addressing extremist violence. He said further action would depend on developments on the ground and continued coordination with Nigerian authorities.
Nigerian officials have maintained that counter-terrorism operations are directed at armed groups threatening civilians, regardless of religion, and have reiterated their commitment to restoring security across affected regions.
