As the opposition parties challenging the (s)election of Bola Tinubu as president closed their arguments at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, the president’s defence counsel in a written address stated: “May we draw the attention of the court to the fact that there is no punctuation (comma) in the entire section 134(2)(b) of the constitution, particularly, immediately after the ‘States’ and the succeeding ‘and’ connecting the Federal Capital Territory with the States. In essence, the reading of the subsection has to be conjunctive and not disjunctive, as the Constitution clearly makes it so. Pressed further, by this constitutional imperative, the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, is taken ‘as if’ it is the 37th State, under and by virtue of section 299 of the Constitution.
“With much respect, any other interpretation different from this will lead to absurdity, chaos, anarchy and alteration of the very intention of the legislature.”
One of the grounds for challenging Tinubu being declared the winner of the (s)election was because he didn’t receive 25% of the vote in the Abuja. While I agree with Tinubu’s counsel on how the 25% requirement should be interpreted, there is little doubt, considering Tinubu’s shady past and identity gaps, that he is eminently disqualified from holding high office. That said, his presidency is also being challenged on grounds that he acquired Guinean citizenship, he forfeited $460,000 due to drug-related offences in the United States, an allegedly forged certificate from Chicago State University as well as said certificate allegedly belonging to a female, and another allegedly forged National Youth Service exemption certificate from 1979, for which the opposition claimed that exemption certificates hadn’t been introduced by then.
Guinean citizenship
If proven, this is a clear breach of Section 137 (1)(a) of the constitution: A person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President if he has voluntarily acquired the citizenship of a country other than Nigeria.
Forfeiture of drug money
A district court in Illinois ordered Tinubu in July 1993 to forfeit $460,000 ruled as proceeds from trade in white heroin by his associates, for whom he was alleged to be laundering money. The relevant constitutional provision here is Section 137(1)(d): he is under a sentence of death imposed by any competent court of law or tribunal in Nigeria or a sentence of imprisonment or fine for any offense involving dishonesty or fraud (by whatever name called) or for any other offense imposed on him by any court or tribunal or substituted by a competent authority for any other sentence imposed on him by such court or tribunal.
Tinubu was clearly fined for being involved in “dishonesty or fraud” but it is arguable whether he is still “under a sentence” for a judgment reached in 1993.
Alleged certificate forgeries
Two cases of forgery are alleged – National Youth Service and Chicago State University certificates. If proven, Tinubu should be kicked out of office as Section 137(1)(j) states a person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President if he has presented a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission.
The election tribunal heard other arguments for voiding Tinubu’s (s)election on grounds of manipulation of result sheets, failure to transmit results electronically, cancellation of some polling units, etc. It is very unlikely that the tribunal would kick Tinubu out on the basis of those arguments, especially as they give room for different interpretations. The certificate forgeries and Guinean citizenship appear to be the most clear cut routes to disqualification, and have given hope, perhaps misguided, especially to supporters of Peter Obi the Labour Party candidate.
It is very interesting to hear that Bola Ahmed Tinubu and APC are already preparing for a rerun. I thought they said our case isn’t strong🤣 Please tell them to stop wasting their time. Tinubu will be disqualified, and Peter Obi will be declared the authentic winner of the… pic.twitter.com/lGIbgKcf9q
— Jaypee (@JaypeeGeneral) July 10, 2023
But the Nigerian judiciary has history of corruption to match the rest of public institutions in the country, while money would be no object for Tinubu in terms of perverting the course of justice. So no one should hold their breath in hope of disqualification as that would be in the realm of miracles.
What happens in the unlikely event that Tinubu is disqualified?
Firstly, the election petition tribunal judges have until September to reach a judgment. Secondly, the party ruled against can appeal to the Supreme Court, who are the final arbiter. If the tribunal’s decision goes against the president, he is unlikely to stepdown until the Supreme Court verdict.
In the event of a Supreme Court judgment against Tinubu, there shouldn’t be “chaos, anarchy” as his lawyers threatened. That said, going by the last (s)election, it is not beyond thugs aligned to the president to unleash an orgy of violence especially in his Lagos stronghold.
In my opinion, Vice President Kashim Shettima has to stepdown as well in the event of a Tinubu disqualification. He can only replace the president in accordance with Section 146(1) of the constitution: if the office of President becomes vacant by reason of death or resignation, impeachment, permanent incapacity or the removal of the President from office for any other reason in accordance with section 143 of this Constitution. Section 143 deals with impeachment.
If Tinubu is disqualified, Shettima has to go with him. The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio will have to step in as president for a period of not more than three months until a new (s)election is held – Section 146(2).
Would Tinubu run again in that (s)election were it to take place? Or would he be satisfied with just having done “emilokan” (“my turn) for only a few months? And who in their right mind, would consider him suitable for the job? We are unlikely to get to the point of needing to find answers to those questions.
