Tinubu Presidential Legal Team Clarifies Watermark Issue on Court of Appeal Judgment Copies*

*Tinubu Presidential Legal Team Clarifies Watermark Issue on Court of Appeal Judgment Copies*

In a recent development, the Tinubu Presidential Legal Team has come forward to address the insinuations surrounding the watermarks on copies of the consolidated judgment of the Court of Appeal. The team clarified that the watermarks, bearing the inscription “Tinubu Presidential Legal Team ‘TPLT’,” were added to the scanned copies of the judgment for internal purposes only and do not appear on the certified true copies issued by the court registry to others.

Following the delivery of judgment in three election petitions on September 6, 2023, the Court of Appeal directed its registry to make physical copies of the judgment available on September 7, 2023. The TPLT promptly applied for a CTC of the judgment and paid the required fee. At the same time, lawyers representing the opposing party, the PDP, were also present to collect their copy.

It is worth nothing that the PDP representative collected the first copy made available by the registry that day. The TPLT, upon receiving their own certified true copy, scanned and watermarked it with the inscription “Tinubu Presidential Legal Team ‘TPLT'” before circulating the scanned copies to their team members. However, the certified true copies issued to all parties by the court registry do not bear this inscription.

The TPLT emphasized that the insinuations being circulated in certain quarters are untrue, unkind, unfair, and unfortunate. They stated that the counsel to the petitioners also possess the same certified copies of the judgment, confirming that there is no difference between the versions received by the respective legal teams.

Babatunde OGALA, SAN; OFR, the Coordinator of TPLT, urged everyone to acknowledge the truth of the matter and refrain from spreading baseless rumors. The TPLT’s clarification aims to clear any misunderstandings surrounding the watermarks and ensure that the focus remains on the substance of the judgment rather than distractions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *