Atiku accused of forgery, impersonation
President Bola Tinubu’s former spokesman in the south east Dr. Josef Onoh has accused former Vice President Atiku Abubakar of certificate forgery and impersonation, citing inconsistencies in Atiku’s primary, secondary and tertiary certificates.
Onoh particularly alleged that the change of name Affidavit which Atiku brandishes was manufactured on a Saturday, contrary to working days which Nigerian courts use to issue such relevant documents.
He branded Atiku as the ‘Harry Houdini’ of impersonation, adding that the former Vice President is also a ‘Cam Gerian’ parading a fake affidavit.
Onoh said that ‘Cam Gerians’ was a name given to Nigerian migrants to south west Cameroon who constituted the largest number of migrants after the 1961 plebiscite where they were denied Cameroonian nationality and citizenship in spite of their long stay in Cameroon and enormous contributions to the development towards their host communities and country, contrary to Atiku’s case in Nigeria where he was allowed to exercise his political liberties and eventually became the Vice president.
Revealing Atiku’s alleged Cameroonian origin, Onoh said that the 2023 presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) originally paraded as “Atiku Kojoli” on his primary school certificate and as “Siddiq Abubakar” in his 1965 West African School Certificate and General Certificate of Examination (WASSCE).
Onoh also pointed that Atiku’s change of name affidavit indicated a date of 18th August 1973 when legally regularised his name from Siddiq Abubakar to Atiku Abubakar, yet there is no clear explanation for the other name, ‘Atiku Kojoli.’
“Marvelously, the said 18th day off August fell on a Saturday and not a working day; Atiku’s signature on the said affidavit didn’t fade after 50yrs to blend with the faded ink characters of the affidavit. Meanwhile, only Nigerian citizens can change their names in their country. Foreigners in Nigeria must first gain Nigerian citizenship before being eligible for a name change,” Onoh stated.
He challenged Atiku to furnish Nigerians a legal and compelling reason for opting for his assorted change of names and to produce the Deed poll executed to change his name in 1965.
“I challenge Atiku to produce any valid document showing he was a Nigerian citizen as at 1965 and prior to the time he changed his name twice. I challenge Atiku to produce evidence that the affidavit he parades was allegedly signed, knowing that it is compulsory for the public to know that he now bears new names, Siddiq, and Atiku, which were supposed to have been published in any legacy newspaper in Nigeria of 1965 and 1973.
“I challenge Atiku to produce, after publication, the copy of his new names, Siddiq in 1965 and Atiku in 1973, which was printed in Nigeria’s official gazette indicating he altered his names.
“Therefore, Atiku is parading a fake unauthenticated document and I challenge him to show proof of the aforementioned documents required for a change of name he complied with in 1965 and 1973. He should also show Nigerians a signed court affidavit confirming his name change which should not be older than one year in 1965 and 1973 and also a newspaper clipping that reflected his announcement of his name change.
“This should also be less than a year from the date of the advertisement in 1965 and 1973. Atiku must submit the declaration/advertisement he typed with two passport-sized pictures of his then most recent appearance in 1965 and 1973, a letter of attestation from a credible source, an official announcement of the adjustment, a copy of the Official Gazette, which includes his name.
“It is therefore clear from the foregoing that the Chief magistrate’s court registry in Apapa Lagos was able to open for Atiku to execute his Affidavit on a Saturday because he, Atiku, is definitely the Harry Houdini of fraud and impersonation,” Onoh alleged.