NYSC Tells Court Uche Nnaji's Discharge Certificate Is Fake

Spread the love

Key Takeaways

The NYSC told the Federal High Court in Abuja that Uche Nnaji’s disputed discharge certificate was not issued by the corps.
NYSC Assistant Director Yusuf Jumare identified four alleged inconsistencies involving the certificate’s prefix, call-up number, service duration and signing designation.
The disputed certificate reportedly carried the prefix “A”, which the witness said was introduced in 1990 rather than 1985.
The witness said the call-up number had four digits instead of the five digits used in 1985.
The prosecution tendered correspondence between the ICPC and NYSC, which was admitted as exhibits.
During cross-examination, Jumare admitted that he had not checked whether Nnaji had ever been issued an NYSC certificate.
The court adjourned the case until November 30 for further cross-examination and January 29 for continuation of the trial.

The National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) has challenged the authenticity of a discharge certificate presented by former Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology, Uche Nnaji, telling a Federal High Court in Abuja that the document did not originate from the organisation.

The position was presented on Tuesday during proceedings in the ongoing criminal trial involving Nnaji, who is facing six counts bordering on alleged certificate forgery and money laundering.

According to testimony presented before Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, an investigation conducted by the NYSC at the request of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) identified four inconsistencies in the disputed discharge certificate.

Four Discrepancies NYSC Identified in Nnaji’s Certificate

Testifying as the second prosecution witness, Yusuf Jumare, an Assistant Director in the NYSC Department of Certification, explained that the investigation indicated that the certificate attributed to Nnaji was not issued by the corps.

Led in evidence by prosecution counsel Jimoh Abdulmumuni (SAN), Jumare outlined four features which, according to him, contradicted the organisation’s certification records and historical procedures.

The first concerned the certificate’s prefix. Jumare told the court that the document, purportedly issued in 1985, carried the letter “A”, although the NYSC only began using that prefix in 1990.

The second discrepancy involved the call-up number. The witness explained that the number printed on the disputed certificate was 0137, consisting of four digits, whereas call-up numbers issued in 1985 contained five digits.

Another inconsistency concerned the duration of service recorded on the document. Jumare said the certificate indicated a service period of 13 months instead of the standard 12-month period.

The fourth issue related to the designation of the official who supposedly signed the certificate. According to the witness, the document bore the designation “National General”, whereas the head of the NYSC at the time was officially known as the “Director”.

These four discrepancies formed the basis of the witness’s position that the disputed certificate did not originate from the NYSC.

ICPC Correspondence Admitted as Evidence Amid Defence Objection

During the proceedings, the prosecution also presented copies of correspondence exchanged between the ICPC and the NYSC concerning the disputed discharge certificate.

The documents were admitted by the court as exhibits.

However, the defence indicated that it would raise objections to their admissibility at a later stage, explaining that its legal team had not been served with copies of the documents.

Responding to the concern, prosecution counsel Jimoh Abdulmumuni said he had only recently taken over the case and undertook to make the documents available to the defence.

The development formed part of the ongoing evidential proceedings, with the defence maintaining its right to address the admissibility of the documents.

What the NYSC Witness Admitted During Cross-Examination

Under cross-examination by Bode Olanipekun (SAN), Jumare maintained that the disputed certificate was not issued by the NYSC.

He explained that the Department of Certification was responsible for keeping records of all NYSC certificates and that such documents were issued only after individuals had completed their national service.

The witness further explained the mobilisation process, stating that NYSC call-up letters were sent to universities, which also forwarded the names of their graduates for mobilisation.

However, an important point emerged during the cross-examination when Jumare admitted that he had not checked whether Nnaji had ever been issued any certificate by the NYSC.

The admission is significant to the proceedings because it distinguishes the witness’s findings concerning the particular document presented from a direct verification of whether Nnaji had previously received any NYSC certificate.

Despite the admission, Jumare maintained his position that the certificate under examination did not emanate from the corps.

Background to Uche Nnaji’s Certificate Forgery Trial

Nnaji, a former Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology and Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governorship candidate in Enugu State, is facing six counts before the Federal High Court in Abuja.

The charges include allegations involving the forgery of his NYSC discharge certificate and University of Nigeria, Nsukka, degree certificate.

The ICPC is prosecuting him over the allegations of certificate forgery and money laundering in charge number FHC/ABJ/CR/389/2026.

Nnaji’s legal team was led by Wole Olanipekun (SAN), alongside Ugwu Onoja (SAN), Bode Olanipekun (SAN) and George Ibrahim (SAN).

The allegations remain subject to determination by the court, and the testimony presented by the prosecution does not in itself amount to a final judicial finding.

Court Fixes Dates for Continuation of Proceedings

Following the day’s proceedings, Justice Joyce Abdulmalik adjourned the case until November 30 for the continuation of the witness’s cross-examination.

The court also fixed January 29 for the continuation of the trial.

The next proceedings are expected to provide further opportunity for the defence to question the prosecution witness as the case continues.

For now, the dispute over the authenticity of Nnaji’s NYSC discharge certificate remains before the court, with the prosecution relying on the inconsistencies identified by its witness and the defence continuing its examination of the evidence.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. Why did the NYSC tell the court that Uche Nnaji’s certificate was fake?

The NYSC witness identified four alleged inconsistencies involving the certificate’s prefix, call-up number, service duration and the designation of the signing official.

2. Who testified against Uche Nnaji in the NYSC certificate case?

Yusuf Jumare, an Assistant Director in the NYSC Department of Certification, testified as the second prosecution witness.

3. What were the four discrepancies identified in the certificate?

They involved the use of the letter “A” as a prefix, a four-digit call-up number, a 13-month service period and the designation “National General” instead of “Director”.

4. Did the NYSC witness confirm whether Uche Nnaji had ever received an NYSC certificate?

No. During cross-examination, Jumare admitted that he had not checked whether Nnaji had ever been issued a certificate by the organisation.

5. Which agency is prosecuting Uche Nnaji?

The Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) is prosecuting him.

6. When will Uche Nnaji’s NYSC certificate case continue?

The court adjourned the case until November 30 for continuation of cross-examination and January 29 for continuation of the trial.

Follow Gossip News Now for more updates on Nigeria’s court proceedings, politics, governance and breaking news.