Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and constitutional lawyer, Dr. Monday Ubani, has stated that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was under no constitutional obligation to submit his primary and secondary school certificates to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), maintaining that while the omission may raise questions about transparency, it does not invalidate the President’s nomination.
Ubani made the clarification on Wednesday during an interview on Frontline, a current affairs programme on Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu, Ogun State, following renewed public debate over President Tinubu’s educational credentials after former Kogi West Senator, Dino Melaye, alleged that the President did not include his primary and secondary school certificates among the documents submitted to INEC for the 2027 presidential election.
The controversy resurfaced after INEC published the nomination documents of presidential candidates, prompting fresh discussions about the constitutional educational qualifications required for the nation’s highest office and whether a university degree alone satisfies the legal requirement.
Addressing the issue, Ubani urged Nigerians to separate constitutional provisions from public opinion, insisting that the matter should be examined strictly within the framework of the law.
“It is about the law, not about sentiment or bias, which I see flying about,” he said.
The senior lawyer explained that Section 131 of the 1999 Constitution only requires a presidential candidate to show evidence of having been educated up to school certificate level or its equivalent and does not specifically mandate the submission of primary or secondary school certificates.
According to him, the constitutional provision has already been interpreted by Nigerian courts, making it clear that candidates are not legally compelled to physically produce school certificates.
“The Constitution says that whosoever will run for the office of the President must show that he has attained education up to school certificate level. There is no legal compulsion that he must disclose or produce his certificate,” Ubani stated.
He argued that although the omission of lower educational certificates may generate public concern about openness and accountability, it remains a moral issue rather than a constitutional violation.
“There is no constitutional compulsion to show certificates, and there is judicial pronouncement to that effect. The Constitution does not require certificate production; it only requires that you show you have been educated up to that level,” he added.
Ubani further explained that where a candidate presents a recognised university degree, the law presumes that the individual must have completed the lower stages of education unless credible evidence is presented to challenge that presumption.
“If somebody has a university degree, the presumption is that he must have passed through primary school, secondary school and university. It is for anyone challenging that to rebut the presumption with evidence,” he said.
While defending the constitutional position, the SAN acknowledged that candidates seeking public office should endeavour to make all relevant credentials available in the interest of transparency.
“I agree that ordinarily, whoever is submitting credentials should also show evidence of primary and secondary school education. Those are moral issues. They are issues of transparency,” he noted.
Ubani also defended INEC’s position that its responsibility is limited to publishing candidates’ documents for public scrutiny rather than verifying their authenticity.
According to him, the Electoral Act does not empower the Commission to authenticate credentials or determine whether a candidate should be disqualified based on the information submitted.
“There is no provision in the Electoral Act that gives INEC the supervisory role of authenticating or disqualifying candidates. The law provides a remedy for anyone who believes that information supplied by a candidate is false,” he explained.
He maintained that any person dissatisfied with a candidate’s educational qualifications must approach the courts within the period prescribed by law after INEC publishes the candidate’s particulars.
“If you are challenging a candidate’s qualification or certificate, this is the proper time to do so, within 14 days after publication. Under the current Electoral Act, if you fail to challenge it at this stage, you may not be able to raise it later as a post-election issue,” he said.
Ubani also commented on concerns over alleged discrepancies in the academic credentials of Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi, following questions about variations in the names appearing on his WAEC, University of Nigeria and National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) records.
He said differences in names do not automatically amount to wrongdoing but must be properly explained and supported with official documentation.
“It’s an issue that requires explanation. There must be public documents showing why the names changed,” he stated.
Speaking on allegations of certificate forgery raised against President Tinubu after the 2023 presidential election, Ubani maintained that the Supreme Court did not make a substantive determination on the allegation because of procedural issues.
“I don’t think there was any judgment on the merits of that allegation,” he said, adding that procedural shortcomings prevented the apex court from making a definitive pronouncement on the matter.
Leave a comment