Alleged Perjury: Group Threatens Buhari's Inauguration, Asks Abuja Court To Stop CJN From Swearing In President-Elect
BEVERLY HILLS, May 26, (THEWILL) –The inauguration of the President-Elect, Muhammadu Buhari, scheduled to hold on Friday appears to have been threatened.
This is as a civil society group Tuesday asked a High Court sitting in Abuja to stop the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Mahmud Mohammed, from swearing in the President-elect over alleged certificate forgery.
The group, Incorporated Trustees of Advocacy for Societal Rights Advancement and Development Initiative (ASRADI),in a suit filed by its counsel, Mr. Philip Ekpo, said Buhari did not meet the qualification enshrined in the 1999 Constitution and the Electoral Act to have contested the position of the president of Nigeria during the 2015 general elections.
Listed in the suit as the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents are Buhari, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Chief Justice of Nigeria respectively.
Asking for an order of interim injunction restraining the 3rd Respondent (CJN) or any person acting in his capacity from swearing in the 1st Respondent (Buhari) as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on May 29th, 2015 or any other date thereof pending the determination of the Motion on Notice, the group said it relied on the following grounds in making the application:
(a.) The 1st Respondent gave false information in the Affidavit he presented to the 2ndRespondent and on the strength of which he contested and purportedly won the presidential election which was conducted by the 2nd Respondent on 28thMarch,2015.
(b.) The 1st Respondent deposed to an Affidavit dated 24th November, 2014 that his West African School Leaving Certificate is in the custody of the Secretary to the Military Board
(c.) The Nigerian Army on 20thJanuary, 2015, said that in the personal file of the 1st Respondent with the Nigerian Army, they do not have the original copy of his West African School Leaving Certificate (WASC) nor does the Nigerian Army have the Certified True Copy of his WASC results neither do they have a photocopy of the said result.
(d.) The 1st Respondent has not met the qualifications enshrined in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Electoral Act, Cap E6, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2010 (as amended) to have contested the position of President of Nigeria at the 2015 general elections.
(e.) That the authority conferred by Section 140 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) on the 3rdRespondent to administer oath of office to any person who will occupy the office of the President of Nigeria cannot be exercised in respect of the 1st Respondent who has not fulfilled the requirements of the same Constitution and the Electoral Act as it relates to his eligibility to occupy the office of President of Nigeria.”
ASRADI, in the originating summons attached to the suit, asked the court to declare that the information contained in the Buhari’s FORM C.F.001 stating that his educational qualification is the West African School Leaving Certificate (WASC) and that same is with the Secretary to the Military Board amounts to False Information.
The group also asked the court to hold that the information contained in the Buhari’s Affidavit deposed to on 24th November, 2014 stating that his West African School Leaving Certificate (WASC) is with the Secretary to the Military Board amounts to False Information.
Though the suit which was filed Tuesday is yet to be assigned to any judge, ASRADI also asked for the following declarations:
“A DECLARATION that the 3rd Defendant is stopped from swearing in the 1st Defendant as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as the issue of perjury involving the 1st Defendant has not been resolved.”
“An order restraining the 3rd Defendant or any person appointed for such purpose from swearing in the 1st Defendant as President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on 29th May, 2015 orany future dates whatsoever for giving False Information to the 2nd Respondent on oath.”
“An order annulling the Certificate of Return given to the 1st Defendant by the 2nd Defendant.”