2023: Lawyer counter-petitions IGP over Tinubu’s credentials
Ojo Ayodele, a legal practitioner, has filed a counter-petition to the Inspector-General of Police (IGP) against a petition giving the IGP an ultimatum to arrest and prosecute All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential candidate, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, for allegedly presenting falsified credentials to secure the party’s ticket.
The counter-petition was filed in response to the Centre for Reform and Public Advocacy’s (CRPA) 48-hour ultimatum issued on Saturday by its Legal Adviser and human rights lawyer, Agu Kalu, threatening court action against the IGP if Tinubu was not arrested and prosecuted.
At the expiration of the ultimatum, the civil rights organization threatened to issue a mandamus order compelling the IGP to arrest and prosecute Tinubu.
In the counter-petition filed on Monday, Ayodele claims that the CRPA lacks locus standi under the nation’s constitution to pursue its petition, describing it as malicious and merely academic.
The petition states in part, “That our client has been in political struggle for the benefit of all Nigerians in general since the days of NADECO and the military juntas/oppression, propaganda, and military dictatorship.”

“We could recall, in the 1990s, when the ex-head of state was attempting to eliminate so many prominent Nigerians like Prof. Wole Soyinka, Kokori, Gani Fawehinmi, Kudirat Abiola, Ken Saro Wiwa, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, and so many others.” Many of them had to flee into exile to escape the military junta and dictator.
“That it was while our client was in exile that his house was ransacked/burgled by thieves, miscreants, and looters.” His certificates were stolen during the looting of his house. That he has deposed to an affidavit to that effect, which is a statement of fact that will follow him to the graveyard.
“We humbly submit to your office, Sir, that one can only use counter-affidavit to refute any statement of fact.” “Because there is no such counter-affidavit before your office, we want you to dismiss this group’s petition because it lacks merit.” That this issue of our client’s certificate has been raised in the past by other politicians, which has been thrashed out and has become a mere academic exercise.”
Instead of threatening to obtain an order of mandamus against the IGP, the lawyer advised CRPA to approach the court if it had any legal remedy.
“We want the Inspector General of Police to know that everything they have asked for through your office is known in law as malicious prosecution, and it has deprived your office of its jurisdiction.” Sir, we respectfully submit that your office lacks jurisdiction over this matter.
“That Centre for Reform and Public Advocacy (CRPA) lacks locus standi to request that our client be tried or investigated because our client had no business with them.” They’re busybodies looking for cheap popularity because our client is a big fish. “There is no way they can prove that our client’s lost documents harmed them more than other Nigerians,” the counter-petition states.
However, the petitioner requested that CRPA be investigated to determine whether the organization is duly registered and that all certificates of their members from primary to secondary schools and tertiary institutions be investigated.
“That none of their members must have deposed to any affidavit for loss of documents or change of name at any time in their lives because doing so is a crime under Nigerian law.”
“It is never a crime under Nigerian or common law for our client to depose to an affidavit of loss of documents.” That is legal. That it is one of the principles of law that he who wishes to come to equity must do so with clean hands, and if he does not come with clean hands, he must be prepared to do anything.” That the Centre for Reform and Public Advocacy is not coming with clean hands. That we are prepared to raise legions of lawyers to defend our client and the Yoruba race. We respectfully request that the petition Centre for Reform and Public Advocacy’s petition against our client be dismissed because it lacks merit and they lack a locus standi in law to do so.”
