Atiku’s witness criticizes the US court for forfeiting $460,000 to Tinubu.
Mike Enahoro-Eba, a prominent witness for Alhaji Abubakar Atiku, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) candidate for president in the most recent presidential election, criticized the decision of the court in the United States of America in which President Bola Tinubu reportedly forfeited $460,000 for alleged drug offences on Friday evening at the Presidential Election Petition Court (PEPC).
The witness, a 17-year legal veteran, acknowledged that the judgment copy was not registered in Nigeria when it was delivered as necessary by law to make it enforceable there.
He acknowledged that the judgment had no proof that Tinubu appeared before the court to enter a plea, stand trial, and be found guilty as required by criminal trial procedure.
Activist Enahoro-Eba, based in Abuja, criticized the verdict while responding to Chief Wole Olanipekun, Tinubu’s lead attorney, during cross-examination.
As a lawyer, he acknowledged distinctions between civil forfeiture and criminal forfeiture.
But he argued that President Tinubu had admitted to forfeiting the funds on his own in a legal case.
The witness whose cross-examination nearly incited the court’s wrath claimed he was unaware of a letter the US Consulate in Nigeria wrote to the Inspector General of Police on February 4, 2003.
In response to a different query from Olanipekun, the witness denied being aware of any arrest warrants issued by the American government against Tinubu.
He acknowledged filing direct criminal accusations of forgery against Tinubu before an Abuja Magistrate Court. Still, he said the case was dismissed due to a lack of jurisdiction by the court.
In addition to criticizing the verdict, the witness was being cross-examined and claimed he was unaware of a public notification published on June 27, 2022, by the Registrar of Chicago University, stating that Tinubu had attended the school and received an honours degree.
Additionally, on cross-examination by Prince Lateef Olasunkanmi Fagbemi, lead attorney for the All Progressives Congress (APC), the witness acknowledged familiarity with Chicago University as a public university founded in 1863.
He claimed that no police officer had a certificate relating to Tinubu’s forfeiture of $460,000 in their possession and that no one’s fingerprint or picture could be found on the copy of the judgment.
After the cross-examination, Chief Chris Uche, the principal attorney for Atiku and the PDP, said that the petition would no longer be prosecuted since they had used up all of the days the court had given them.
Tinubu, APC, and INEC must each launch their respective defences in the case on July 3 according to a date set by the court’s presiding justice, Justice Haruna Simon Tsammani.