President Bola Tinubu has filed a motion seeking to stop Chicago State University (CSU) from releasing his academic records to Atiku Abubakar, presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
A United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois had on Tuesday ordered CSU to produce relevant documents showing the academic information of Tinubu who claims to have attended the university.
Abubakar had approached the court seeking to compel the institution to grant his request on the grounds that the documents would strengthen his suit challenging Tinubu’s electoral victory.
Jeffrey Gilbert, US magistrate judge, granted the request and ordered CSU to release Tinubu’s records within 48 hours.
However, in an application before a federal judge, Tinubu is seeking to be joined in the suit because it is his personal information that is being sought.
“Mr Tinubu should be allowed to join or intervene because he has a direct personal interest in records sought, his interests are not fully represented or protected by Respondent Chicago State University, and his interests will be affected if he is not permitted to join or intervene,” the motion filed by Christopher Carmichael, Tinubu’s lawyer, reads.
“Chicago State University stated that its obligation is satisfied by providing notice of the application and attempt to access the records.
“Chicago State’s position is that it does not have an obligation to oppose the application and, therefore, CSU does not adequately represent Mr Tinubu’s interests.”
He is also asking that the order of the court should not be given effect until his application is determined.
The president is equally demanding the authority of the magistrate to issue the order against CSU.
“Intervenor asks this court to enter an immediate order delaying the effect of the magistrate’s order, at least until Monday, September 25, 2023, so the court may fully consider both the scope of the magistrate’s authority to issue the order without review and the issue of whether the magistrate’s order was a correct application of the law to the facts presented,” the document further reads.
“Intervenor raises a substantial question about the magistrate’s authority to resolve the Section 1782 petition and order immediate compliance by Chicago State University.
‘If Chicago State University complies with the Magistrate’s order prior to this court having an opportunity to review the order, Intervenor will suffer prejudice because the information will have been disclosed and effective relief will be impossible.”