Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and constitutional lawyer, Dr. Monday Ubani, has maintained that President Bola Tinubu was not constitutionally required to submit his primary and secondary school certificates to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as part of his nomination documents for the 2027 presidential election.
Speaking on Frontline, a current affairs programme on Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu, on Wednesday, Ubani said the controversy surrounding the omission of the certificates should be examined strictly within the framework of the Constitution and existing judicial interpretations rather than public opinion.
The issue resurfaced after former Kogi West Senator Dino Melaye questioned why Tinubu’s primary and secondary school certificates were not included among the documents published by INEC for public scrutiny.
According to Ubani, Section 131 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) only requires a presidential candidate to have attained education up to school certificate level or its equivalent, adding that the law does not expressly mandate the submission of primary or secondary school certificates.
“The Constitution is clear on the educational qualification required for anyone seeking the office of President. It requires evidence that the person has been educated up to school certificate level, but it does not compel the physical production of those certificates,” he said.
He explained that Nigerian courts have previously interpreted the constitutional provision, making it clear that possessing the requisite educational qualification is different from producing every academic certificate obtained at lower levels.
Ubani stressed that while some members of the public may consider the omission undesirable, it does not amount to a constitutional violation capable of invalidating a candidate’s nomination.
“In law, there is no constitutional compulsion to produce primary or secondary school certificates. At best, the issue is one of transparency and public perception, not legality,” he stated.
The constitutional lawyer further argued that the submission of a recognised university degree creates a legal presumption that the holder successfully completed the earlier stages of education required to obtain the degree, unless credible evidence is presented to prove otherwise.
“If someone presents a university degree, the law presumes that the person must have passed through primary and secondary education. Anyone disputing that position has the responsibility to produce evidence to rebut that presumption,” he added.
Despite defending the constitutional position, Ubani acknowledged that candidates seeking elective office should embrace greater openness by voluntarily disclosing all educational qualifications.
“Ordinarily, a candidate should present evidence of primary and secondary education in the interest of transparency and accountability. However, that is a moral expectation rather than a constitutional requirement,” he noted.
On INEC’s role in the nomination process, Ubani said the electoral commission is not empowered to authenticate or verify the validity of documents submitted by candidates.
He explained that the commission’s responsibility is limited to receiving and publishing candidates’ credentials, while the law provides an avenue for any aggrieved individual to challenge allegedly false information before the courts.
“INEC has no statutory duty to determine whether a candidate is qualified or disqualified based on the documents submitted. Its responsibility ends with publication, while anyone dissatisfied can seek judicial intervention,” he said.
Ubani also commented on questions surrounding the academic records of Labour Party presidential candidate Peter Obi, following concerns over differences in the names appearing on his WAEC, University of Nigeria and National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) documents.
He said variations in names are not necessarily proof of wrongdoing but should be properly explained and supported by legally recognised documentation.
According to him, any legitimate change of name should be backed by appropriate public records to eliminate doubts.
Addressing previous litigation over allegations of certificate forgery against President Tinubu after the 2023 presidential election, Ubani said the Supreme Court did not make a substantive pronouncement on the allegations because the matter was not determined on its merits.
He further emphasised that disputes relating to a candidate’s educational qualifications are pre-election matters and must be filed within the timeframe stipulated by the Electoral Act after INEC publishes candidates’ particulars.
“If anyone intends to challenge a candidate’s qualification based on educational credentials, the appropriate time is within the statutory period after publication by INEC. Failure to act within that window may prevent such issues from being entertained later,” Ubani said.
