TD A fresh legal and public controversy has erupted over President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s educational records, with human rights lawyer Professor Chidi Anselm Odinkalu and Barrister Kalu Kalu challenging Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Babatunde Ogala, over his defence of the President’s position.
The dispute centres on claims concerning Tinubu’s educational history, documents submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and previous court cases relating to his eligibility to contest presidential elections.
The controversy intensified after Ogala appeared on television and argued that the issues had previously been taken to court and that those who challenged Tinubu’s qualification had lost.
Ogala Says Challengers Lost in Court
Speaking during a television interview, Ogala said Kalu had previously challenged the issues in court and should establish his claims through the judicial process.
“Mr. Kalu has also challenged these issues that we are discussing here in court.
“I’m not going to go into the details of his case or our case against our answer to him, which is where we have joined issues with him.
“But he should go and prove it in court. In 2020, all of them lost on this same issue,” Ogala said.
Ogala’s position has been interpreted by critics as a defence of Tinubu against allegations concerning his educational credentials and other documents.
Odinkalu Questions Legal Defence
Reacting to Ogala’s comments, Professor Chidi Anselm Odinkalu questioned the legal and ethical basis of defending a public official against allegations concerning his educational history.
Odinkalu wrote:
“You are a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, SAN. That means you have a minimum of 2 degrees.
“A senior public officer comes to hire you to argue that he does not have to go to primary school.
“You take the brief and start asking people to go to court to prove that your client didn’t go to primary school. Are you ok?!”
Odinkalu’s intervention has added another dimension to the controversy.
He shifted attention from the political dispute to the professional responsibilities of lawyers representing public officials.
Kalu Challenges Ogala to Produce Judgment
Barrister Kalu Kalu subsequently responded to Ogala’s comments, challenging the SAN to produce the judgments he relied upon in asserting that the courts had settled the matter.
Kalu disputed the suggestion that any Nigerian court had determined, on the merits, that Tinubu was qualified after examining the specific allegations concerning alleged forged documents.
“I challenge Ogala SAN to come to national television with any of those judgments he referred to that held that Bola Ahmed Tinubu has been adjudged by any court in Nigeria to be eminently qualified to run the election,” Kalu said.
He further asserted that no Nigerian court had made a substantive determination on the merits of allegations concerning alleged forgery by Tinubu.
“There is no judgment of court anywhere in Nigeria… that has decided on the merits the issue of the forgery by Bola Ahmed Tinubu,” he said, challenging Ogala to produce any contrary judgment.
Kalu Renews Questions Over School Records
Kalu also renewed questions concerning Tinubu’s educational history.
He specifically asked which primary and secondary schools the President attended, arguing that those questions were central to the controversy.
According to Kalu, attention should focus on whether documents allegedly submitted to INEC were authentic rather than on peripheral issues.
He alleged that Tinubu made a declaration in 1999 claiming attendance at Saint Paul’s Primary School in Ibadan and challenged the President, his handlers and Ogala to dispute the allegation if it was incorrect.
Kalu also repeated allegations concerning documents allegedly submitted during the 1999 and 2022/2023 electoral processes.
Dispute Over What Previous Courts Actually Decided
The latest exchange has highlighted a significant disagreement over the interpretation and scope of previous litigation involving Tinubu.
Supporters of the President maintain that various legal challenges to his qualification have been unsuccessful and that the courts have effectively upheld his eligibility to contest presidential elections.
Critics, however, contend that dismissal of an electoral or qualification challenge does not necessarily amount to a judicial finding that every allegation concerning a candidate’s documents has been proven false.
They argue that a distinction should be made between a court deciding whether a petition or case meets the applicable legal requirements and a court making a specific finding on the authenticity of individual documents.
Controversy Remains Unresolved in Public Debate
The latest confrontation between Ogala, Odinkalu and Kalu has once again placed Tinubu’s educational records and electoral documentation at the centre of national debate.
While Ogala maintains that the issues have already been litigated and that challengers lost in court, Kalu is demanding that the specific judgments being relied upon be produced and examined.
The allegations concerning forged documents remain allegations and should not be presented as established facts without supporting judicial findings or independently verified evidence.
The dispute therefore continues to straddle three separate questions:
- what Tinubu’s educational records contain,
- what documents were submitted to INEC, and,
- precisely what previous Nigerian courts have determined about those documents and his constitutional eligibility.
Until those questions are resolved through authoritative documentary evidence or judicial findings, the controversy is likely to remain a recurring feature of Nigeria’s political and legal discourse.
