Opinion

The Chicago bullfight between Atiku and Tinubu – Simon Kolawole

Published

3 years ago

October 8, 2023

Simon Kolawole

The Chicago bullfight between Atiku and Tinubu – Simon Kolawole

May I, at this point, humbly retract certain claims I made in my article, ‘Tinubu and Atiku: Birds of a Feather’ (THISDAY, June 12, 2022), months before the 2023 presidential election. In it, I claimed that Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Alhaji Atiku Abubakar “are friends, associates and two peas in a pod”. I traced their bond to the annulled third republic. I said they had been there for each other during political upheavals. As simple as it was, I didn’t remember that there are no permanent friends or foes in politics. Just permanent interests. All gloves are off now. Atiku is on an all-out war with Tinubu whom he wants disqualified and removed as president for alleged certificate forgery.

On Thursday, Atiku revealed that he had parted ways with Tinubu as far back as 2007. I hereby confess that I did not know this. In separate private conversations I had with both men before 2007, they came across as David and Jonathan. What we have today is nothing but Cain and Abel, although I’m not sure who is the Cain and who is the Abel. As Atiku has now told us, they cut political ties when he refused to make Tinubu his presidential running mate in 2007 because of the Muslim-Muslim ticket complications. I recall Tinubu opposing Atiku’s election petition against President Umaru Musa Yar’Adau in 2007 on the ground that all of them were from the same political family.

To be sure, this is not the first time Atiku is seeking a judicial decision on the basis of certificate in a presidential election. In 2019, he fought President Muhammadu Buhari all the way to the Supreme Court, maintaining that he did not have the requisite educational qualification to be president. Buhari had listed secondary school education on his INEC form but did not attach the West African School Certificate, which he claimed was with the military authorities. He eventually received a replacement from Cambridge, which used to conduct the WASC exams, and presented it to the tribunal. Atiku’s petition was dismissed. He also lost in the Supreme Court — but Buhari was hurt.

This time around, Atiku is seeking to prove that the Chicago State University (CSU) certificate presented to INEC by Tinubu is a forgery and, therefore, he was not qualified to run in the first place. Many people did not really give serious attention to this allegation in Atiku’s petition until he went to file for “discovery” at a US court on August 2, 2023, seeking an order to compel CSU to release Tinubu’s academic records. This was a day after the presidential election petition court (PEPC) had announced that it was adjourning to deliver judgment after all the petitioners, Atiku inclusive, and respondents had concluded their submissions. The US case, thus, basically went under the radar.

READ ALSO:

The PEPC actually prevented Atiku from arguing the forgery allegation on a technical ground. Atiku’s lawyers introduced the triple allegations of Tinubu’s conviction in the US, forgery of documents and dual citizenship long after they had filed the petition. The certificate was notably not on their list of proof of evidence. However, as the proceedings went, they introduced the issues. Tinubu’s lawyers said the time for filing new facts was over. Atiku’s lawyers said they were only providing further details. The PEPC, in its judgment, held that the electoral law provides that all evidence must be frontloaded and since this was not contained in the petition itself, Atiku had missed the timeframe.

In truth, Atiku did not have what he could present as evidence as at the time the PEPC sat and gave judgment. Maybe the lack of evidence contributed to the little attention paid to Atiku’s moves in the US. With the PEPC judgment going against Atiku on September 6, he decided to head to the Supreme Court — this time hoping that he could file a new evidence on the authenticity of Tinubu’s CSU certificate, known as “diploma” in the US. Still, many did not give much attention to this case until September 19 when the US court ordered CSU to release the academic records in time for Atiku’s appeal at the Supreme Court. It was at this stage that the internet caught fire as interest ballooned.

What did Atiku want to prove by demanding all these records? From all that I have read so far, I would summarise his intentions as follows: (1) to prove that the certificate Tinubu presented to INEC was forged (2) to argue that this is not the real Bola Tinubu (3) to create a moral crisis for Tinubu home and abroad. When Tinubu’s lawyers protested against the release of his records claiming it could hurt their client, even his own supporters began to panic. Many of them asked: “What is Tinubu trying to hide?” My first reaction was that his lawyers were trying to be dramatic. I had always believed Tinubu attended and graduated from CSU but that the devil is in the details.

Tinubu’s records were finally released. The CSU registrar, Caleb Westberg, made a deposition as a witness and representative of the university. He had previously sworn to an affidavit as well. If you lie under deposition, it is called “perjury” and you will have no option than to go to jail. So, it is not a joke. We all looked forward to the deposition as the final stage of the US leg in the post-election litigation. Atiku’s lawyers questioned Westberg extensively on the affidavit and the records. Westberg said so many things that, at a stage, my head was steaming from information overload. At the end of the deposition, the camps of Atiku and Tinubu both claimed to have won. It got more interesting.

I will try to summarise the testimonies as I understand them. Westberg swore to an affidavit that Tinubu graduated and was awarded a degree with honours from CSU on June 22, 1979. He said CSU awarded him a diploma and subsequently provided a certified (that is, official) copy of that diploma. He said both are “valid and authentic” diplomas from the university. He said there are differences in font, seal and signatories on the diplomas because many things had changed over the decades from 1979, when Tinubu graduated, to the 1990s, when he got a replacement. He said the discrepancies in the dates on the documents were possibly human since they were entered manually.

READ ALSO:

In the affidavit that accompanied the academic records, Westberg said the format of Tinubu’s replacement diploma dated June 27, 1997 matches the format of diplomas produced in the 1990s and 2000s. From the deposition, it appears there are two different CSU diplomas. There is the CSU diploma issued in 1979 when Tinubu graduated and there is the replacement dated 1997. Meanwhile, a diploma was released to Mike Enahoro-Ebah, an Atiku supporter, based on a court order. It is either Enahoro-Ebah was given the original 1979 version (which Tinubu presumably did not pick up then) or Enahoro-Ebah was given a replacement Tinubu ordered and didn’t pick up.

The one presented to INEC by Tinubu was dated 1997. The date was declared an error by the university. Michael Hayes, who also testified for CSU, took personal responsibility for the error and said he meant to type 1979, not 1997. I recall that in my journalism school days when typewriters were a thing, we called this “error of transposition” — when you mistakenly hit the second key before the first, meaning “9” would come before “7” in 79. It appears that the certificate Tinubu presented to INEC was another version entirely — produced in the 1990s or 2000s. Westberg, in his deposition, said he did not see what was presented to INEC and could, therefore, not comment on it.

So, why did the university certify the documents? He said the university does not usually certify documents but this was at the insistence of Tinubu’s lawyer. “It seems to be a Nigerian thing,” he said. (By the time this got into social media, the registrar was reported to have said: “Forgery is a Nigerian thing.”) Westberg also addressed why they had copies of diplomas for 1979 but didn’t have one for Tinubu. He said some students don’t pick up their diplomas — tying it back to the fact that it is the transcripts, not the diplomas, that really matter in the US. It is copies of unclaimed diplomas that he released to Atiku’s lawyers with the names of the students redacted for privacy reasons.

What else? Westberg said Tinubu attended Southwest College (now known as Richard Daley College), a feeder school for CSU. He said the Tinubu that attended Southwest College and transferred to CSU had the same social security number (like the NIN in Nigeria), and that it is the same person that is now president of Nigeria. On why the gender of the student that attended Southwest was written as “F” (female), he said it was possibly a clerical error as he himself did not know whether Bola Tinubu is the name of a male or female. But he pointed out that Tinubu filled “male” in his application form and was addressed as “Mr” in the letter offering him admission.

READ ALSO:

Overall, I think Atiku’s team conclusively proved at the deposition that the diploma presented to INEC by Tinubu was not the one issued in 1979 — as Enahoro-Ebah had obviously collected it or whatever version was in the file. And I think this is why Atiku’s supporters believe they won the tug-of-war. On the other hand, what Tinubu presented to INEC was not the 1979 diploma but a replacement. Westberg did not answer questions on the “INEC diploma” on the ground that it is not in the school’s possession. But he said Tinubu indeed applied for a replacement and if a 1979 diploma was to be replaced, there would be changes in format, font, seal and signatories as seen in the “INEC diploma”.

All eyes are now on the Supreme Court. Atiku’s lawyers will hope to use the academic records and the deposition to make a compelling case against Tinubu. There are still obstacles. One, they have to convince the court that a new evidence can be filed at this stage. If the Supreme Court exercises discretion and decides to allow new evidence, that will be a major hurdle scaled. The next hurdle will be the evidential weight the court attaches to it and if it is convinced beyond reasonable doubt that Tinubu actually committed forgery. These are the matters to be pursued and argued by the lawyers before the court. I can’t wait for all this to be over so we can face the core business of governance.

Whatever the case may be, this is a fight to the finish. No retreat, no surrender. I am, however, astonished at how Atiku has overtaken Peter Obi, the LP candidate, in the election petition race. Obidients had clearly dominated the airwaves in claiming Obi won the election and that Tinubu stole his mandate. Atiku, who officially came second, was always playing catch-up. But with a single burst of pace in September, Atiku has — like a seasoned marathoner — surged to the front in the race to upstage Tinubu. All the Obidients that I know are now rooting for Atiku. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Remember: there are no permanent friends or foes in politics. Just permanent interests.

(THE CABLE)

Opinion

2027: Competence, Not Zoning, Should Decide Nigeria’s Next President — Imasuagbon

Published

6 days ago

September 13, 2026

Hamdalat Bisiriyu

Nigerians should look beyond ethnicity, region and the longstanding debate over rotational presidency when choosing the country’s next leader, according to a chieftain of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Kenneth Imasuagbon.

The former Edo State governorship aspirant said the priority ahead of the 2027 election should be finding a president with the ability to confront Nigeria’s economic, security and infrastructure challenges.

Speaking to journalists in Benin, Imasuagbon argued that presidential rotation is not a requirement of the Nigerian Constitution and should therefore not outweigh the question of competence.

He said voters should be more concerned about replacing poor schools with better ones, improving healthcare and addressing hardship than debating where the next president comes from.

Imasuagbon specifically appealed to voters in the South to support former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who is contesting the 2027 presidency on the ADC platform.

According to him, Atiku has demonstrated the experience and determination needed to improve the country, describing the former vice president as someone capable of promoting national unity and fairness.

He also accused the Bola Tinubu administration of worsening economic pressure through policies including the removal of fuel subsidy, while expressing concern about the condition of roads, electricity and other infrastructure.

Imasuagbon argued that the next administration must focus on practical improvements in areas such as power, transportation, employment, security and public services.

The ADC chieftain also dismissed the idea that the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) would automatically benefit from its incumbency advantage in 2027.

He maintained that the electorate ultimately determines the outcome of an election, arguing that voters could change the political direction of the country if they were determined to do so.

Imasuagbon further criticised what he described as regional and ethnic considerations in the distribution of political appointments and opportunities, insisting that the next president should give Nigerians across different parts of the country a sense of belonging.

His comments come as political parties and their candidates intensify preparations for the 2027 presidential election.

Opinion

Lesson from Dotun Oladipo’s Brave Daughters, by Bamidele Johnson

Published

6 days ago

September 13, 2026

Trends Admin

Lesson from Dotun Oladipo’s Brave Daughters, by Bamidele Johnson

I hope to grow old. I want to see my kids become real adults, find their own feet, make mistakes, recover from them, and perhaps one day complain that their own children are giving them grey hairs. I want that plainly stated before anything else, as everything that follows might read as a man agreeing to an early exit rather than a man simply being honest about the odds.

I want the decades. I want to become the grandfather who repeats the same stories until nobody bothers correcting him anymore. But wanting a thing and being granted are different things. The last year has made that difference harder to ignore than I would like. I have lost many friends recently to keep thinking that optimism is my natural resting state. Some of these men had better blood pressure than mine, better habits, better everything that is supposed to count. It did not save them.

There is no formula I know that reliably separates the men who make it to 70 from those who do not. Anyone who says he knows one is selling something. So, I do not assume that old age is an already booked destination. Even if I once did, which I doubt, the last three years have cured me of such an illusion. As such, I treat it as a hope rather than an expectation, and I have found that a more honest way to live.

It is exactly why I want something placed on record now, while I am still able to place things on record, rather than leave it for people to guess what my wishes were in the fog of a funeral week. If I do not make old bones, my children are not to be asked to read tributes at my funeral. Not one line, however short, however lovingly written.

This, for me, was settled today rather than re-opened. At Dotun Oladipo’s funeral service, his three daughters took turns to read their tributes to their dad, and I found myself watching them with awe. There was a kind of strength in them that I do not possess. It is the strength needed to stand in front of a hall brimming with grieving adults and speak about a man they have just lost. Forever. Strength, however, is not the same as ease. I could see plainly what that strength was costing them as they read. Their voices caught. Their composure held and then did not hold and then held again through sheer will.

In front of them, in the pews, men and women considerably older than them came undone in ways the girls themselves were somehow managing to resist. I went mightily close. Some of the sobbing was quiet, the type people try to fold into a handkerchief. Some of it was not quiet at all, the kind that announces itself whether or not you want it.

Those young women honoured their father with a grace that is beyond me. What they did was astonishing. So, what I am attempting is an observation of a custom I have now watched wound people. This was not the first time I had watched this particular ritual extract more than it should from people already running on fumes. I saw an earlier and harder version of it at a friend’s wake back in 2015.

The first son was called forward to read his father’s tribute, and he could not do it. He tried, but the words would not come, and he stood there in front of a crowd of mourners, with his grief simply refusing to organise itself into sentences. The officiating minister, rather than releasing him from the task, urged him to continue. I sat fizzing with sorrow and ire. He could not go on and, eventually, the minister accepted, but not before insisting a while longer than it should have reasonably taken. His younger brother was called up next, presumably on the theory that if one grieving son could not manage it, maybe another one could. He flunked it in the same way. Grief does not distribute itself more conveniently among siblings just because a programme has been printed and needs to be followed.

I have turned that memory over many times since, trying to work out why this part of the rites is treated as mandatory in the first place. I have not found a satisfying answer. Maybe it comes from a belief that a child’s words carry more weight than anyone else’s, which may even be true, but weight is exactly the problem when those carrying it are struggling to hold themselves together with nothing but adrenaline and the fear of dissolving in public.

Maybe it is simply inertia, the reason we still do a hundred things at funerals that nobody can explain the original purpose of. Either way, I have stopped looking for the justification. I no longer think one exists that is good enough to weigh against what I watched happen to that boy in 2015.

So, let this stand as my instruction rather than my preference, the kind of thing I would rather state plainly now than leave for my children to infer later from how uncertain I sound when the subject comes up in passing. If I do not get the old age I am hoping for, my children will not be asked to read a single word over my body. Someone else can speak for me. A friend, a stranger with a steadier voice and a smaller stake in the loss, anyone whose grief will not be quite so total that standing upright becomes almost impossible.

My children, of course, will sit in front and fall apart if that is what the day requires of them, but without the microphone. That, at least, is one small mercy I intend to arrange for them while I am still here to arrange it.

Dotun deserved every bit of the send-off his daughters gave him today, and I suspect he would have been the first to tell them to sit down and let someone else carry the weight for a while. He did not get a say in that, as none of us ever do once we are the ones being spoken of rather than the ones speaking. Rest well, Dotun. You raised three young women whose strength I will not soon forget. That alone says everything worth saying about the man you were.

Opinion

‘Tinubu Will Win Again in 2027’ — Charismatic Bishops’ Secretary

Published

7 days ago

September 13, 2026

Hamdalat Bisiriyu

‘Tinubu Will Win Again in 2027’ — Charismatic Bishops’ Secretary

A senior Nigerian cleric, Archbishop Chivir Chianson, has declared that President Bola Tinubu will retain the presidency after the 2027 general election, attributing the prediction to a message he said came from God.

Chianson, who serves as Secretary General of the Charismatic Bishops’ Conference of Nigeria, made the statement while appearing on Arise Television on Saturday.

Rather than basing his prediction on political calculations, the archbishop said his confidence came from what he described as the prophetic role of bishops.

He maintained that the conference had previously spoken about Tinubu’s political future based on what he said was divine revelation and that the President would return for another term.

Chianson also predicted that Tinubu’s performance would improve if he wins the 2027 election.

READ ALSO:

Addressing the political opposition, the cleric said the bishops could not be blamed if rival parties failed to unite or organise themselves effectively ahead of the election.

He also sought to clarify the position of the bishops when dealing with government, saying their role in speaking truth to power did not mean they should approach political leaders with hostility or disrespect.

According to him, the Constitution, alongside their religious convictions, should guide how they engage the President and the country.

Chianson said he was sufficiently confident in his prediction to promise that he would return to the Arise TV studio after the 2027 election, when he expects the result to demonstrate that the bishops’ prophecy was correct.

His comments add a religious dimension to the increasingly active political conversation surrounding the 2027 presidential race.