The principal of Sultan Abubakar College, Sokoto, where the Kebbi State Deputy Governor, Sen. Umar Abubakar said he finished from in 1979, has tendered 15 documents before the Governorship Election Court sitting in Birnin Kebbi, Kebbi State, to counter the claim.
The principal, Muhammed Zayyanu Umar, while being cross-examined by counsels to the Governor and Deputy Governor respectively, insisted there was no records in the school to support the testimonial alledgly given to him from the college because his name was not on the list of the 1979 graduands of Sultan Abubakar College, Sokoto.
The peoples Democratic party Governorship candidate, Gen. Aminu Bande (rtd), is challenging the victory of the candidates of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Gov. Nasiru Idris and his Deputy, Umar Abubakar in the last general election.
The principal was the first subpoenaed witness to be cross examined by the respondent counsels after the tribunal admitted the 15 documents he presented to it.
While giving his testimonies and answering questions from the respondent counsels, Barr. ⁶Wale Agunbiade SAN, Yakubu Maikyau SAN and others, the principal insisted that based on the documents he submitted to the tribunal, the results of 1979,1980,1981 and 1982 did not carry the name Umar Abubakar who alleged to be a graduand of the college within the period particularly in 1979.
He insisted that based on the available records in his office as principal of Sultan Abubakar College, Sokoto the deputy governor did not finish from the school in 1979.
A Director in Sokoto State Ministry of Education, Abdulsamad Hamzat Yisa, who was summoned to the court said the ministry had set up a committee to investigate the principal, but they found that the correspondents between the office of the principal and office of Nura Bello and Co Chambers were in order.
Earlier, the counsels to the respondent had objected to the continuation of the hearing on the ground that the list of witnesses were served on them around 8pm. They argued that report of pretrial indicated that parties should be served list of witnesses within 24 hours.
But the petitioners counsels told the tribunal that apart from the list of 15 witnesses scheduled to testify there are other subpoenaed witnesses which are court witnesses not petitioners witnesses.
On that ground the tribunal chairman, Justice Ofem I. Ofem ruled that, on one part, agreed with the respondent counsels that since the notice served them was not within 24 hours the tribunal will not proceed to take the witnesses but on the other hand subpoenaed witnesses which notice was served to the respondent since 12th of July would be heard.
The petioners had filled list 21 witnesses,15 of them are normal witnesses while six are subpoenaed witnesses from government agencies and departments.
