Politics
Analysts Downplay Tinubu, Atiku Educational Certificates Controversy
The controversies surrounding the educational certificates of some presidential candidates who will be contesting the 2023 presidential election, have been described as a non-issue by some lawmakers and activists.
Those who spoke with The Tide over the issue, noted that such controversy was not new to the political system of Nigeria.
The All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential candidate Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, had claimed in the forms he submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that his primary and secondary school certificates were stolen by unknown persons, who invaded his home during the military junta of the ‘90s when he fled the country over his support for the revalidation of the June 12, 1993 presidential election.
For that, many Nigerians who had raised concerns over the development called for the disqualification and prosecution of the former Lagos State governor, whom they alleged lied under oath over academic qualifications.
A non-governmental organisation, Centre for Reform and Public Advocacy recently issued an ultimatum to President Muhammadu Buhari and the Inspector General of Police to arrest and prosecute Tinubu for allegedly supplying false information to INEC.
Legal Adviser of the group, Mr Kalu Agu, at a press briefing in Abuja, said that the alleged offence committed by the former Lagos State governor breached both the Constitution and the Electoral Act.
In the same vein, Tinubu’s running mate, Kabiru Masari told INEC that his original certificates are missing.
Reports had it that Masari in particulars submitted to INEC deposed to an affidavit on the loss of his primary and secondary schools certificates.
He, however, said that he attended Masari Primary school, Katsina State between 1972 and 1978 and obtained a Grade 2 Certificate from Katsina Teachers College in 1982 and a Higher Certificate in 1995.
Masari in the sworn affidavit for ‘Loss of Some Original Documents’, obtained from Divisional Police Headquarter, Wuse Zone 3, Abuja attached to the particulars he submitted to INEC, said, in January 2021, that, while on transit within Wuse, Area FCT, Abuja, he lost his Certificate of Grade 2 Certificate from Katsina Teachers College and First Leaving Primary School Certificate issued by Masari Primary School, Katsina State, (1972-78).
He also said that all efforts made to trace the items proved abortive.
On his part, the presidential candidate of the main opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, had a few questions raised about his academic credentials.
Atiku, who served as the country’s Vice President from 1999 to 2007, was said to have not provided information on his primary education.
The 1965 West Africa School Certificate (WASC) result presented by him, allegedly identified the student as Siddiq Abubakar.
While reacting to the issue, a member of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Olanrewaju Oshun said the issue of certificates as far as he was concerned, is a non-issue and unfounded.
Oshun, the member representing Lagos Mainland Constituency 2, said, “This is a man that worked with Mobil and he was recruited from his school. If he didn’t have that qualification, how was he recruited from the school? Are we saying Mobil didn’t check his qualification?
”He was a Senator and he was governor of Lagos State for eight years. All these shouts about him not having certificates are mere political gimmicks.
“If you say he doesn’t have primary and secondary school certificates, how was he able to attend a prestigious university abroad.
“You can’t be admitted into any university in Nigeria without a secondary school certificate not to talk of attending a university abroad. This is not new. They said the same thing in 2015 about Buhari.”
A United States based public affairs analyst, Prof. John Oshodi said, “At no point did Tinubu say he had no primary or secondary school education.
Even if he is not able to show the concrete certificates, whether due to being lost or accidentally damaged, how does that show he has no basic educational background?
“One thing is certain: He is a Nigerian-educated person who earned a Bachelor of Science Degree in Business and Administration with a major in accounting from Chicago State University in 1979.
“In past election seasons, through media hysteria, President Buhari, also an American trained military scientist with post-secondary education, was said not to have a WAEC certificate and, so, he is not eligible to vie for any elective position.
“Let’s say that Buhari’s basic educational certificates were with the military, like he said, or they could not be located, what cannot be denied by the American government is that Buhari holds a diploma from the United States Army War College.
“On the part of Atiku Abubakar, the media has it that he holds a secondary school education, although not of the highest level.
“He has post-secondary education in hygiene science and a diploma in law, and in recent times, he has worked hard and now has a master’s degree in International Relations from the United Kingdom.
“What is most stunning about the current uproar is that a basic education such as a primary or secondary school certificate is required to be president, as in the case of Tinubu.
”In 2019, it became a settled matter when the Supreme Court held that Buhari, per the constitution, is not required to possess a secondary school certificate to be qualified to run for the presidency and does not have to submit it to INEC to run for the presidency.
“Yet in a society where lawlessness and lack of respect for operating laws are rampant, you in the media and the people should be asking the presidential candidates about how they will handle monumental problems like crime and security, poverty, unemployment, poor electricity, infrastructure and road hassles, illegal substitution of candidates’ names, and human rights abuses,” Oshodi added.
The state chairman of the party, Dr Babandi Gumel, disclosed this in a statement signed and made available to journalists on Saturday.
According to the statement, the Jigawa PDP received news of Alhaji Lamido’s suspension with “profound shock and disappointment”.
The statement added that the suspension, which was reportedly based on allegations that Alhaji Lamido attended meetings capable of undermining party unity, amounts to an affront to justice, internal democracy and the reconciliation efforts recently championed by the PDP leadership.
The party stressed that the exercise of legal and constitutional rights within the party should not be interpreted as an act of disunity. It recalled that Alhaji Lamido approached the court after he was allegedly denied the opportunity to purchase a nomination form to contest the position of National Chairman of the PDP.
The statement further noted that the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled in Alhaji Lamido’s favour by restraining the PDP from proceeding with its national convention until his right to contest was determined.
The Jigawa PDP argued that the suspension appeared to be a punitive action against Alhaji Lamido for seeking judicial redress over an issue on which the court had already found merit.
The party also faulted the decision of the BoT for contradicting recent public statements by its chairman, Senator Adolphus Wabara, who had emphasised reconciliation within the party, admitted past mistakes and appealed to aggrieved members to return fully to the PDP fold.
However, it maintained that suspending a founding member who sought justice through legal means runs contrary to the spirit of reconciliation and healing publicly advocated by the party leadership.
The chairman said the suspension was premature and prejudicial, as the matter remains before the courts. He also described Alhaji Lamido as one of the few founding fathers of the PDP who has remained loyal to the party without defecting, warning that punishing such loyalty sends a negative signal to other committed members.
The party further argued that the action undermines party unity at a time when the PDP requires cohesion to effectively challenge the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). It also insisted that there is no provision in the PDP constitution that allows for the suspension of a “life member”.
The party called on the BoT to immediately and unconditionally withdraw the suspension of Alhaji Lamido.
It also demanded that the BoT publicly affirm the right of all party members to aspire to leadership positions in line with the party’s constitution and the laws of the country, without fear of victimisation.
It further urged the BoT to retrace its steps, align its actions with its reconciliation agenda, and tender an apology to Alhaji Lamido.
The Jigawa PDP reaffirmed its commitment to a united, democratic and law-abiding Party.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, CISLAC warned that if proven, such actions would amount to a serious breach of constitutional order, legislative integrity, and public trust.
The organisation noted that Nigeria’s law-making process is clearly defined by the Constitution, stressing that any alteration of a bill after parliamentary passage undermines democratic governance and the principle of separation of powers.
CISLAC further emphasised that taxation has direct implications for citizens, businesses, sub-national governments, and the overall economy. It stated that uncertainty or a lack of transparency in tax legislation could erode investor confidence and raise concerns about accountability and the possible abuse of executive power.
The organisation described the situation as particularly troubling given the rare inclusive, and thorough public consultation that shaped the law’s final provisions prior to its passage.
“This process brought together taxpayers, civil society groups, professional organisations, the private sector, labour unions, local governments, and technical experts, ensuring that diverse viewpoints were considered and carefully balanced.
“Any unilateral changes to these agreed-upon provisions, made outside the established legislative process and without renewed public engagement, not only breach public trust but also violate the fundamental tax principle of representation, which holds that citizens must have a meaningful voice in shaping the laws that govern how they are taxed. Such actions undermine democratic accountability, weaken the legitimacy of the tax system, and risk eroding public confidence”, it noted.
CISLAC expressed particular concern that uncertainty surrounding the authenticity of the tax law, coming at a time when a new tax regime is expected to take effect, could exacerbate the economic hardship already faced by many Nigerians.
It observed that citizens are contending with rising living costs, inflationary pressures, declining purchasing power, and reduced access to basic services, warning that implementing a disputed tax framework under such conditions, risks deepening inequality, discouraging compliance, and fuelling public resentment.
The organisation stressed that tax reforms must be anchored in clarity, legality, fairness, and social sensitivity, cautioning that any tax system introduced without full transparency, adequate public communication, and legislative certainty undermines voluntary compliance and weakens the social contract between the state and its citizens.
As part of its recommendations, CISLAC called on the Presidency to urgently publish the exact version of the tax law assented to, alongside the authenticated copy passed by the National Assembly, to allow for public and institutional verification.
It also urged the leadership of the National Assembly to promptly exercise its oversight powers to determine whether the assented law reflects the will of the legislature, including a review of the enrolled bill process.
The organisation maintained that any discrepancy discovered should be treated as unconstitutional and addressed through lawful means, such as the re-transmission of the correct bill or judicial interpretation where necessary. It further called for an independent review of the process by relevant institutions, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and, where required, the judiciary, to establish the facts and assign responsibility.
CISLAC noted that the controversy highlights the urgent need to strengthen safeguards at the legislative and executive interface. It recommended measures such as digital tracking of bills, public access to enrolled legislation, and more transparent assent procedures.
CISLAC emphasised that the issue is not about partisan politics but about safeguarding the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic institutions. It warned that allowing any arm of government to unilaterally alter laws passed by another sets a dangerous precedent and weakens constitutional democracy.
The organisation urged all parties involved to act with restraint, openness, and fidelity to the Constitution, noting that Nigerians deserve laws that reflect due process, the public interest, and the collective decisions of their elected representatives.
CISLAC added that it will continue to monitor developments and engage relevant stakeholders to promote accountability, transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria’s governance processes.
