Mr. Kalu Kalu who is a lawyer to the Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the 2023 general elections, Atiku Abubakar, has accused President Bola Tinubu of submitting a forged degree certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) ahead of the just concluded elections.
The lawyer made this accusation on Thursday during a press conference held by Atiku after the Chicago State University released the President’s academic records to him.
Although the President and his supporters have denied the allegations, Mr Kalu explained that the released document backs the forgery claims.
Read Also: INEC Schedules Governorship Elections In Edo, Ondo State
Asked what the documents show, he said, ‘One, that Bola Ahmed Tinubu forged the certificate he presented to INEC. That, two, that the qualifying certificate from South West College to Chicago State University bears a female name indicating that that document does not belong to Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Three, the Chicago State University admission form has a claim that Bola Ahmed Tinubu attended Government College Lagos and graduated in 1970 when indeed the school was established in 1974.
‘The same document has it that the owner of that document is a black American and (in) the document Bola Ahmed Tinubu submitted to INEC, he denied having dual citizenship which means it does not belong to him. Then, the same document, oral deposition, said the A in Bola A Tinubu is Ahmed but the NYSC certificate Bola Ahmed Tinubu submitted to INEC has Adekunle. I don’t know where Adekunle emerged from.’
Former Vice President Abubakar is asking the Supreme Court to overturn Tinubu’s election after the Presidential Election Tribunal dismissed his petition.
As part of his move to overturn the result, he successfully filed a case in the US and his legal team received the academic records of the President which has been the subject of controversy.
When Mr Kalu was asked at the press conference what value he expected the documents received to have at the Supreme Court, he said, “It is very, very clear that from decided authorities, the Supreme Court has held that they can accept a party to adduce fresh evidence as long as certain conditions are met and from what transpired in proceedings in US courts, that condition has been met.