The university, in its response to Atiku’s application, said it does not “understand” why Tinubu’s academic records “could possibly have any bearing on a 2023 election challenge in a foreign country”.
CSU argued that some requests in the application are “clearly inappropriate”, adding that the applicant is also seeking the employment details of one of his former employees.
“Finally, in the event the Court determines to allow any discovery to proceed here, the University urges the Court to direct only limited, targeted discovery on the University,” CSU said in a response filed by Michael Hayes, its counsel.
“As leave to issue any discovery has not yet been granted, and the Court’s views on what if any discovery is appropriate here under 28 U.S.C. §1782 are not yet known, it is premature for the University to raise objections to the scope of the documents and information sought in Abubakar’s two subpoenas.
“But without limiting further objections, which the University expressly reserves, the University notes that the scope and relevancy of certain of Abubakar’s requests are clearly inappropriate.
“For example, Abubakar’s document subpoena Request No. 5 seeks information on diplomas issued by the University for a 44-year period (1979 to the present), and Abubakar’s deposition subpoena Topic No. 7 seeks information on the employment status and reasons for departure of a former employee in the University’s General Counsel’s Office
