Atiku Abubakar Not Fit To Contest For President, AGF, Malami Tells Court

11 min read 2,018 words 0 views

Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice
Abubakar Malami (SAN) has argued that former Vice President Atiku
Abubakar is not eligible under the constitution to contest for
President.

The AGF argued that, having not been born a Nigerian or by
Nigerian parents, and having not met the provisions of Sections
25(1) &(2) and 131(a) of the constitution, Atiku would be
violating Section 118(1)(k) of the Electoral Act should he put
himself forward as candidate.

These form part of the AGF’s arguments in support of the suit
filed before the Federal High Court, Abuja by the Incorporated
Trustees of Egalitarian Mission for Africa (EMA).

The EMA is challenging Atiku’s eligibility to contest for
President and praying the court to hold among others, that
considering the provisions of sections 25(1) &(2) and 131(a) of
the constitution and the circumstances surrounding his birth, the
former vice president cannot contest for the top office.

In documents filed for the AGF by a team of lawyers, led by
Oladipo Okpeseyi (SAN), it was agreed that, as argued by the
plaintiff, Atiku is not a Nigerian citizen by birth.

Although the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/177/2019 was filed before
the 2019 presidential election, it is yet to be heard and
determined.

However, it was mentioned on March 15, during which Justice
Inyang Ekwo noted that the suit was ripe for hearing and fixed May
4, for that purpose.

The AGF in the affidavit said: “The first defendant (Atiku) is
not qualified to contest to be President of the Federal Republic of
Nigeria. The first defendant is not a fit and proper person to be a
candidate for election to the office of president of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria.

“The first defendant was born on the 25th of November, 1946 at
Jada, at the time in Northern Cameroon. By the plebiscite of 1961,
the town of Jada was incorporated into Nigeria.

“The first defendant is a Nigerian by virtue of the 1961
plebiscite, but not a Nigerian by birth. The first defendant’s
parents died before the 1961 plebiscite.”

In his written address, the AGF argued that the effect of the
June1, 1961 plebiscite was to have the people of. Northern Cameroon
integrated into Nigeria as new citizens of the country, even after
Nigeria’s independence.

He added: “This qualified all those born before the 1961
plebiscIte as citizens of Nigeria, but not Nigerian citizen by
birth. Consequently, only citizens born after the 1961 plebiscite
are citizens of Nigeria by birth.”

He cited provisions of the 1960, 1963, 1979 and 1999
constitutions and noted that the “reasoning of the lawmakers in
ensuring that the persons to be the President of Nigeria is a
citizen of Nigeria by birth is because such a person is the number
one citizen and the image of the Nigerian state.”

The AGF argued that, where it is revealed that a person was born
outside Nigeria before Nigeria’s independence in 1960, in a
location which was never part of Nigeria until June 1, 1961, as it
is in this case, such a person cannot claim citizenship of Nigeria
by birth.

“This is even more so where his parents do not belong to any
tribe indigenous to Nigeria until their death. The facts of his
(Atiku’s) birth on the Cameroonian territory to Cameroonian parents
remain unchallenged.

“At best, the first defendant can only acquire Nigerian
citizenship by the 1961 plebiscite. The citizenship qualifications
under Section 26 and 27 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal
Republic of Nigeria (1999), by implication, has limited the first
defendant’s privileges or rights and cannot be equal or
proportional to the privileges of other citizens who acquire their
citizenship status by birth.

“This would include the legal preclusion of the first defendant
from contesting for the office of the President of Nigeria.

The AGF noted that the only situation where Atiku could have
acquired Nigerian citizenship by birth under the 1999 Constitution
was if both or either of his parents and grand parents were
Nigerian citizens by birth.

He added that another way would have been “if either his parents
had become Nigerian citizen by virtue of Section 25(1) of the 1999
Constitution, which must be in compliance with Sections 26 and 27of
the same constitution.

“With no concrete proof of compliance, we submit that the first
defendant cannot contest election to the office of the Nigerian
President.”

Section 26 contains the process of obtaining citizenship by
registration, while Section 27 provides for the process of
obtaining citizenship by naturalisation.

The AGF argued that Atiku, having contested election to the
office of the Vice President before now, knowing that he is not a
Nigeria citizen by birth, committed an offence under Section
118(1)(k) of the Electoral Act.

Atiku and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) on whose platform
he contested the last election, have denied the plaintiff’s claims
and prayed the court to dismiss the suit for lacking in merit.

They also filed a joint notice of objection, in which they
insisted that Atiku is “a bonafide citizen of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria.”

Atiku stated that aside serving as Nigeria’s Vice President from
1999 to 2007, he held many public/private offices, including
serving as Governor of Adamawa State and as a Commissioned Officer
of the Nigeria Customs Service.

He said both his parents, grandparents and great grandparents
were born in Nigeria and they lived, died as Nigerians and were
buried in Nigeria.

Atiku argued that he is qualified and eligible to be elected
into the office of the President of Nigeria, adding that the
plaintiff filed the suit in bad faith and in an attempt to malign
his person and integrity.

He queried the plaintiff’s right to challenge his nationality,
arguing that it failed to show the interest it has above other
citizens of Nigeria to be entitled to approach the court on the
issue.