 The reaction to President Buol HaExok政策 and this appleema is awakes politics. I missed the Chicago State University certificate saga of President Buol HaExok政策 There has been several reactions from various persons by Kalu and lawyer of former Vice President, Tiku Obubaka pointing out the discrepancies in the certificate, such as a gender mix-up, a difference in signatures, high school graduation date, and supposed first certificate and identity theft. Sinibu submitted to INEC. He denied having dual citizenship, which means it does not belong to him. Then the same document or at the position says that the A. Bola A. Sinibu is Ahmed. And the documents Bola Ahmed Sinibu submitted to INEC. He denied having dual citizenship, which means it does not belong to him. Then the same document or at the position says that the A. Bola A. Sinibu is Ahmed. But the NOS certificate Bola Ahmed Sinibu submitted to INEC. He denied having dual citizenship, which means it does not belong to him. I don't know where the Adekunle and the Ahmed emerge from. So on the second arm of your question of what use will it be in the Supreme Court, it is very very clear that from decided authorities the Supreme Court has held that they can accept a party to reduce fresh evidence as long as certain conditions are met. And from what transpired in the proceedings in US courts, that condition has already been met. So as we speak, our law is very clear that a party at forth cannot be allowed to enjoy the fruit of his illegality. President Inumbu's lawyer Wolia Falabi has explained that the certificate indicating female is as a result of the mix-up on the part of the university. And for the difference in signatures, certificates were not issued at the time of graduation until one applied for them. On the other hand, former chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, Monde Ubani, former deputy chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, or second vice chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association, Monde Ubani has justified why the Supreme Court may not admit fresh evidence, such as this because their job is to review the decision of the court below and not to evaluate any evidence. Joining me to discuss all these reactions among, Otumba Shaygun show me PDP Governorship Esperant Ogun State and Mr. Fairley Smoker, National Publicity Secretary of Progressive Congress. Gentlemen, welcome to plus politics today. Thank you. Let's start with Mr. Fairley Smoker. Mr. Smoker, you have a very acoonian job to hand these days, I would want to suppose. How are you handling it? How are you engaging your public, at least letting them see the facts from your perspective? Well, the problem is not as difficult as you would imagine. Yes, it imposes on our time, but in terms of explaining our side of this matter, it's not that complicated because we are not the ones making the assassinations. We're not the ones making these wild allegations about documents that were forged in the United States and in the country here. So, you know, our job is simply to clarify that the president, Aswajibullah Amethinubu, contested in a prior election and was declared winner. And certain other candidates who contested, you know, being dissatisfied with the declaration of this president as winner of that election, decided to go to the tribunal. And they brought their cases. And on this matter, under discussion, Alajia Chukwabaka contended at the tribunal that this president did not attend the Chicago State University CSU. That was the bone of contention. And the tribunal resolved that matter and put it to rest. But of course, as we all know now, subsequently, Alajia Chukwabaka proceeded to the United States to begin to interrogate the certificates of this president. And we know today for a fact that the CSU has since verified on oath that Bola Amethinubu was their student undertook the program of study and graduated from that university with honors. There's an affidavit to that effect on a provocal unmistakable. Now, those who choose to pick holes and still now raise a new issue, no longer the issue that he didn't go to CSU, but now that he fought the certificate. Look, it is their burden to prove, you know, to the satisfaction of the Supreme Court. You know, it's not my duty to do anything. Okay. Okay, let me quickly just tell my question with this. You may not quite have a lot to prove at the Supreme Court and it be oaths, it be oaths the person who alleges to affirm. But the Court of Public Opinion out there, I would suppose, given your portfolio in the APC, I would suppose, you know, how lacerating that court could be. Sometimes when one perception or misperception are played. What's your take about that? Just briefly before I go to your colleague. I agree, you know, that's why we're having this conversation. That's why in the past few days, since this press conference, you know, to the best of my efforts. I've been out there and some of my colleagues have also been out there explaining, you know, our understanding of this matter. Yes, we know the Nigerian public, you know, if they have questions, they deserve answers. And that's exactly what we're trying to provide. But that's the best you can do because people who are interested in peddling, you know, on truths, they will do so irrespective because their goal is not the Supreme Court. Their goal is to delegitimize this precedent. That's what it's about. Okay. That also came out, you know, from the from the mouth of the candidate of the PDP. But I will stop here so that you can you can ask a lot of questions. Or two by showing me, I guess you must have. Good evening. Good evening. I guess you must have read Mr. Moka's piece yesterday. A kind of rebuttal to the world press conference. But even if you've not read it, you've listened to him, you've heard him. From where you are, what will be your response to his initial remarks? Thank you very much, my dear friend Bola. Thank you. Let me greet my friend Felix Moka too. We know ourselves for many years. I'll start by saying very clearly that the most important I need to answer to is that is there a precedence in the Supreme Court as it concerns taking in evidence. And I think one of the quickest that I could easily bring up is the judgment of retired justice of the Supreme Court, CD Dowder Baggy. And please let me read what he says so that Moka and his friends can just be a little bit guided. The court shall take the lead in writing the wrong in our society if and when the opportunity prevents itself as in this appeal. I like criminality and certificate for you to continue to participate in the stream. Waters are notions of our national policy will only mean our waters are and will remain dangerously contaminated. I repeat, dangerously contaminated. The privilege of the court must start now and be sustained. As you see it as a nation to now change from our old culture of reckless impunity. The Nigerian constitution is supreme. It desires that no one who has ever presented for certificate to INH contest elections in Nigeria. This is clear and cyclical. More comparing as a judicial determination has taken by no less a technical panel sitting and at least a panel of three are the tribunal and constitutional mandate to determine such issues as the related election is outcome eligibility. This has also been affirmed by a lot of trial court. Also I'm sure Moka being a lawyer is aware of section 137 of the Nigerian constitution which says that and I'm trying to go so that I will not be I won't go the judges out of context. It says section 137 1j of the Nigerian constitution. You are not qualified to run for office of precedent if you have prevented for certificate to INH. Now let me now go into some other areas. It is a symbol narrative misdirected to say that the pleadings of and the I want to have to cover the PDP. Let me put it that way. So to call does not include the fact that if for certificate order is not qualified and all of that. I think you will have to go and read what was pleaded out in the issue. In any case, like I keep saying to them, I do not and I believe and I plead with every person around us in the PDP. We have not appropriated the absolute authority and the grandeur of the Supreme Court to ourselves. But let me beg this our friends do not appropriate what the Supreme Court can do or not do to yourself either. What is the issue of state? The issue of state is very clear. I want to put a follow up question that is quite relevant to your submission. I wonder given the copious passages of the constitution and the pronouncement of justice of the Supreme Court that you have just quoted. I wonder if your camp that is excellency vice president. I think what people can scan if you really believe in the proactive value of that evidence that you've just garnered from the United States of America. Why did you people organize that press conference yesterday when in every material particular it could be said to be subjudice and you could be saying to be shooting yourselves in the foot. Well, you recall in one of the codes that one of the American presidents very revered and highly respected said if they had to choose government without newspaper and journalists, he would choose the one that has newspapers. Hello? Hello Otumba? Is Otumba still there? Okay, Mr. Malka? Yes. It does seem that I wouldn't want to describe this to Juju or something from the village. But you've been able to get him off. I guess why was getting more intellectually lacerating. I wouldn't describe it to Juju. But the gentleman just read out some fantastic legalistic passages. One from the constitution and another from a retired justice of the Supreme Court. You admire yourself and what would you take on a submission and reasoning? The nature of zoom meetings to have these fluctuations. But what I was actually trying to say, I mean you don't like zoom meetings, I like to be in studio to avoid all these glitches. But be not as it may. You will notice that what we said was that there are two sides to a conversation of this nature. There is a part that the lawyers will deal with and that's why we are always very reluctant to get into the legal part. And there is a part that obviously is a matter of public interest. And because our friends are quick at trying to throw in materials into public space that seeks to say maybe everybody in the country drinks from their table of influence. And therefore there are no alternative opinions. The only truth was the reason why we had a press conference. And what we said there was very clear. This is why we've gone to America. This we've got, we've got there. But we stopped short of going into the detail. The position is close to 200 pages. Another line of documents were provided. They are picking the ones they like. Maybe if you like you can even say we are picking the ones we like. But the fact of the matter is that you can't have multiple names. They cannot disown your certificate. They can't tell tales as to how you got it. You can't be happy with yourself that just one human being's document has many coloration, many names, many explanations. Some of them extremely absurd to all of us and people all over the world. Every explanation for the real explanation is the one they are taking. And the real deal is that we hold the view that that certificate is not authentic. Okay. About time I went to your colleague. Dr. Moka, sorry. And thank you very much for being polished because you just allowed him to have his flaws straight when he came in. It shows a degree of polish in you. I really appreciate that because he could have been convinced. Please, that's fine. Okay. But having said that, I was asking you. I asked you, he submitted some fantastic legalistic documents. Or he wrote us some fantastic legalistic documents. A justice, a retired justice of the Supreme Court in one of his rulings and the Constitution. And from the two, it does seem that the fallage of the reasoning of the supporters of the precedent may have been somewhat intellectually rubbish. What would be your response to that? No, that's not the case. Let me put both things in perspective. At the first was a court of a judge, a justice of the Supreme Court I imagine. Speaking to the need for the legal system and the judicial system to view more seriously the question of fordries and distortion of documentation. Now, that is a need. He was speaking broadly and generally, you know, speaking to fordries as a crime, not specific to any particular, you know, individual or trend. He was simply framing a legal issue to say that the courts will view that matter with seriousness. What do you know as Carl Ibuka? Completely. It was just him. It was not Sanayana there. The second point that my dear friend raised had to do with the constitution that says that if you forge documents, therefore you are ineligible to context. Look, nobody doubts that if you forge a document that there are consequences for fordry. That's not in dispute. I'm not going to debate that with my dear friend. But the point is that for you to make to apply that provision, there are certain hurdles you must cross. This is a criminal allegation which you must prove beyond reasonable doubt. It's not something you do wishfully. It's not allegation you make and you just make it and it falls in place. No, you do not taint a man with guilt unless he is properly tried and convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction. In this case, I don't know how the PDP or the candidate proposes to convert this to the level of criminal inquiry that is required to prove. But look, all we are saying is that the election petition tribunal that gave verdict in this matter that is not before the Supreme Court is a civil court. It's not a criminal court. Yes, within a civil process, you can also raise issues of crime. But even within that civil process, you are required to prove it beyond reasonable doubt. Again, as I said in the beginning, this is all the burden of the PDP and the candidate to establish. And I don't see anything in the transcript that my friend also refers to. I've read the transcript. It's right here. This is the complete volume. I've read it top to bottom. I've marked every piece of it. And this is an affidavit. Given by the same registrar, Mr. Khalib Westbank, in a two-page affidavit, where he absolutely, without any equivocation, made clear that this president was the student and graduated from the school and was awarded the degree. Mr. Moka. Mr. Moka. So they can go to the Supreme Court and actually make their part. Mr. Moka. That's all there is. Just let me be mischievous. If this is as pedestrian and as mundane as you are making it seem to look like, why did they write that copious piece yesterday? You wrote an intellectual statement. Because I don't know why. You wrote an intellectual statement. And the bottle have the one press conference. If it's not them, if it's not that forceful. But you stated the purpose, the reason at the beginning of this show. You were right on the mark. You said that there is the legal question which the courts must resolve as courts. But there is also the other matter that is within the court of law. Where perceptions sometimes matter more than the facts. If you push this narrative that the president forces certificate, even though that is not true, even though it's not supported by the facts, if you say it long enough as they are doing, somebody at home, someone in Nassan Nigerian, may begin to believe it. And it is imperative upon us to clarify and present the facts as they are. So you go to the Chicago, you come back home. There's no need to distort the facts of what happened. Tell the facts as they happened. If you must tell the public, tell it as it happened. Thank you very much. The press conference was not truthful. There was a lot of distortion of the facts yesterday. Okay, about time I went to your colleague. Otoma, your colleague is asserting that the Chicago excavations are simply like a mystic vision of the south that even after that, the press conference yesterday could at best be said to be a festival of presumptions. And some people out there are even saying maybe because I think we knew all the so-called evidences. He had gone out from Chicago, would be going nowhere first at the supreme court. He just wanted to further, further, you know, galvanize a kind of reactions in the court of public opinion will be a reaction to these submissions. Gola, thank you. Let me put it on record that this conversation we are having is not the prettiest that I like to have. And it's not something I do with relish or I do with pride. My head is bowed because of the seriousness and implication of the conversation. But I will say that the first thing you must let Felix take back to his friends in the villa is that don't worry about whether what we are saying is right or will be accepted by the court. Don't worry. That decision is that of the supreme court. I only quoted seven sections of the constitution to let you understand that they are just fooling themselves. There is not pathway for the court to take that evidence and will provide it. That's number one. Number two, help me asking the university, either under the position or under when they were being cross-examined or what do you call it, did they ever say one, that they assert that that certificate is from them and that that certificate, they provided it or did they say they could really explain how the secondary school he used as the basis for his entry became a secondary school that did not even exist at that time or did they own the entry requirement from the other Chicago college which had a female which they are calling typographical error. Did they also own the fact that in the deposition some of the materials are flying around that the social security number on that particular thing belongs to another person with a similar name who are supposed to be a female. Did they say that the NYS this certificate presented that has a name which is never called themselves that way is the same. Did they say that the guy that is before us an American citizen and not a Nigerian citizen did they say that the date of birth is the same. Look, I have said it over and over and over let us not take the role of the Supreme Court I do not want to take their role but Felix and his gang should please also not try to take the role of the Supreme Court we were disciplined enough we were statementally enough to say after I come back from the Supreme Court if they give that thing to me okay, if they give that thing to him okay, why don't they wait. The only conversation we can engage in right now is that of the owner of the entire country ask Felix and his friend where does this man come from what promise could he go to which circumstances could it be he didn't want any bad or the one in Lagos that did not exist before him when did he do his national youth service is he an American citizen or a Nigerian citizen does he have how many dates of birth these are the issues that you bring to public opinion and it's on those issues I want us to discuss because to discuss the law we have to wait for the Supreme Court but there seems to be in a hurry to say that everything we are saying and I ask them are you going to be legalized on issues that needs to be morally discussed and flawed when we leave it to the court if they get to the court we will provide the evidence they should not be in a hurry Otumba come as I hope that has been in public for more than 25 years deserves to be respected Otumba I want to ask you a very personal question you may answer or may not answer depending on are you in any way she performing intimidated by anybody from any direction of the state and the reason why I am asking is that a number of persons who ought to have sat where you sit now today one told me Bella I've had enough broke back since yesterday one told me and I respect that Felicity is the equivalent in the PDP he says he is a lawyer and the matter is of UDC and he wouldn't want to do it directly but he suggested you and I really want to thank the gentleman for that but having said that one gave me the impression and I don't want to mention his name he gave me the impression as though he has been intimidated as anybody in any shape or form intimidated you since yesterday that I will press conference took place but what I have said to people who have brought up conversations of this nature is that cowards die many times before their deaths and that it is not enough for you to be brave when there are no strong issues to push what is more important is for you to be brave when bravery is needed it is not for lack of concern what is their attitude and their potential let me put an addendum to it like this and the addendum will be as anybody said what are you doing this that is the most that is correct a lot of people have done that but what I have said to them is that the race of Yoruba people cannot in the seriousness of our preeminence and our history allow the narrative to run in all corners of the world and within all the other ethnic groups that we are a people that have no honor an honor to the world let me go to your colleague others must be our attitude for ourselves let me go to your colleague Felix I don't really envy your job but you are doing it well enough I don't see any other intellectually robust persona doing it better than this but you will agree that the worst especially in the public opinion are somewhat scorching am I right? no, not exactly let me say a few things I am being very measured in this conversation because I am speaking to Mr. Shoe Ume that I have known for many years and I am trying to but I would urge that my friend will refrain from characterizing Felix and the gang and using those kinds of references I take exception because I can also take my gloves off and actually hit back really hard but that is unnecessary I hope that is noted please I don't know how this conversation is as respectively as possible the point here is this I am sitting here just wondering why my friend is making these suggestions about the APC suggesting that this matter should not be discussed or that we are preempting or in some ways trying to prejudge the outcome of the Supreme Court review that is not the case nobody is doing that we did not call the press conference you did we did not make an allegation against you made an allegation against Bola Metsinubu you went to the public space to throw down matters that you barely you are just scratching and being very emotional to drum up just to whip up sentiments and create this public narrative but this president did something that was wrong you did that you took this matter from Nigeria where we have the fullness of the court system to the other states to go there to discuss you did that so why are you acting so sanctimoniously as if you are innocent and APC is merely just saying nobody said you should go to the press conference you called it we only responded to what was said you cannot possibly make these sort of outlandish allegations against the citizen forget that he is president if you do that against me I will come out charging at you because you can do that and then expect that they are not going to give you a response I am going to give you a response you start saying oh they are trying to prejudge nobody is prejudging I said I have said you are welcome you already have an appeal at the supreme court I believe feel free to go there and dump as much material as you wish I have confidence that the judges at the supreme court I have the capacity to review anything you judge and apply the law as they understand it I am not speaking I am not trying to say anything about what they are doing I am only saying that you can present your facts but after you done that you must also pass for the other side to present their own rebuttal and then the judges will make their call that is the way it works gentlemen I have not forgotten anything gentlemen we go on a short break and when we are back we still go ahead pressing the emotional the intonational the moral handles of this issue and more actually thank you