From Victor Osula, Abuja
Former Vice President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, has launched a fresh legal challenge against President Bola Tinubu, asking the Federal High Court in Abuja to disqualify the President from contesting the 2027 presidential election over allegations surrounding his National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) certificate.
Atiku personally appeared at the registry of the Federal High Court on Friday to depose to an affidavit in support of the suit, saying the issues raised go beyond politics and strike at the heart of constitutional governance, the integrity of the Presidency and the rule of law.
The suit names President Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as defendants.
At the centre of the action is Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which disqualifies any person from contesting the office of President if he or she has presented a forged certificate to INEC.
According to court documents, Atiku and the ADC contend that Tinubu submitted an NYSC discharge certificate bearing the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle”, which they argue differs from the President’s official identity, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The plaintiffs further allege that the certificate was submitted in relation to both the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections and insist that the authenticity and ownership of the document should be subjected to judicial scrutiny.
Explaining why he personally swore to the affidavit, Atiku said the matter demanded personal responsibility.
“I came here personally because the issues before the court go to the heart of our Constitution and the integrity of the office of President. I cannot ask Nigerians to respect the Constitution while treating a matter of this magnitude casually. I have therefore put my name, my signature and my oath behind the facts we are presenting to the court. Now, it is President Tinubu’s turn to answer them,” he said.
He added that the court, rather than political debates or social media campaigns, remains the proper forum to determine the dispute.
“If the certificate belongs to Bola Ahmed Tinubu, let that be established before the court. If ‘Tinubu Bola Adekunle’ and ‘Bola Ahmed Tinubu’ are the same person for that certificate, let the evidence establish it,” Atiku stated.
Beyond the certificate allegation, the suit asks the court to compel INEC to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 and other nomination documents submitted for both the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
According to the affidavit, Atiku had earlier applied for certified true copies of the documents but had not received them before instituting the legal action.
The plaintiffs are also challenging aspects of the Electoral Act 2026, arguing that certain provisions unlawfully restrict who can challenge the qualification of presidential candidates before an election and improperly narrow constitutional grounds for questioning a candidate’s eligibility.
They contend that no Act of the National Assembly can override or diminish constitutional provisions relating to qualification for elective office.
According to Atiku, the case raises a fundamental constitutional question over whether ordinary legislation can shield a presidential candidate from constitutional scrutiny.
The originating summons therefore seeks, among other reliefs, a declaration that the disputed provisions of the Electoral Act cannot prevent the enforcement of Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution and an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election if the allegations are established.
Atiku also argued that ordinary Nigerian graduates are subjected to rigorous verification of their academic and NYSC credentials before securing employment, insisting that anyone aspiring to the nation’s highest office should not be held to a lower standard.
He further called on INEC to demonstrate neutrality by producing all relevant records before the court, stressing that the electoral body has a constitutional obligation to assist the judiciary in determining the issues raised.
Counsel to the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu, SAN, and Joseph Onu Silas, expressed confidence in the case, describing it as one capable of further shaping Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence.
Silas said the legal team had carefully examined the applicable laws and was prepared to defend its arguments once the defendants were served with the court processes.
