Atiku Takes Tinubu to Court Again, Seeks Amendment to Disqualify Him From 2027

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and the African Democratic Congress, ADC, have returned to the Federal High Court in Abuja with a fresh request in their legal battle against President Bola Tinubu ahead of the 2027 presidential election.

Atiku and the ADC are asking the court for permission to amend the suit in which they are challenging Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the next presidential election.

The plaintiffs want the amended case to strengthen their claim that Tinubu should be disqualified from the 2027 election over an alleged forged National Youth Service Corps, NYSC, discharge certificate submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.

The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, has Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress, APC, and INEC as the first, second and third defendants respectively.

The latest application was brought before Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court.

Atiku and the ADC are seeking an order granting them leave to amend their originating summons.

They also want the court to deem the amended processes as properly filed and served.

The plaintiffs explained that the amendment became necessary after they noticed errors in the way some INEC documents attached to their affidavit were described.

According to them, some of the documents were referred to as Form CF001 when they should have been identified as Form EC9A.

They also want to provide more details about the alleged fraud at the centre of the case.

The plaintiffs said the proposed amendment would allow them to set out the particulars of their allegation more clearly.

They also intend to include Atiku’s written deposition and attach clearer copies of documents already referenced in the proceedings.

The move comes days after the case was stalled at the Federal High Court because of difficulties surrounding service of the originating summons on President Tinubu.

At the earlier proceeding, counsel to Atiku, Joseph Onu, told the court that the plaintiffs had been unable to personally serve the President.

Counsel representing Tinubu had reportedly attempted to receive the court documents on his behalf, but the plaintiffs declined, insisting on personal service or an appropriate order for substituted service.

Justice Ekwo subsequently adjourned the matter to September 28 for further proceedings.

The suit itself centres on an NYSC discharge certificate which Atiku and the ADC allege was submitted to INEC by Tinubu as part of documents used to establish his eligibility to contest the presidency.

In the affidavit filed in support of the case, Atiku alleged that the certificate bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle”, which he says is different from the President’s name, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

Atiku has argued that the document was presented to INEC as genuine despite the alleged discrepancy.

He is asking the court to determine whether the alleged submission of the certificate falls within the constitutional provisions that could prevent a candidate from contesting for the office of President.

The plaintiffs are relying, among other provisions, on Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended. The provision deals with disqualification arising from the presentation of a forged certificate to INEC.

Tinubu and the APC have rejected the allegations.

In their joint counter-affidavit filed on September 9, the President and the ruling party denied submitting any forged certificate to INEC for either the 2023 or 2027 presidential elections.

They also disputed the claim that Tinubu submitted Form CF001 to INEC for either election.

The defendants further maintained that the NYSC had never denied issuing a discharge certificate to Tinubu after his service year.

Their legal team has also challenged the competence of the case.

Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, counsel to Tinubu and the APC, argued that allegations of forgery are criminal in nature and must be established with the required standard of proof.

He maintained that the plaintiffs would need evidence from the institution allegedly responsible for issuing the disputed certificate if they wanted to establish that the document was forged.

Olujinmi said Atiku and the ADC had not produced any evidence from the NYSC disclaiming the certificate allegedly issued to Tinubu.

He therefore urged the court to dismiss the case.

The defendants also questioned the legal standing of Atiku and the ADC to bring the action against Tinubu and the APC.

They argued that the suit does not meet the requirements for a competent pre-election matter and maintained that the plaintiffs cannot challenge the internal affairs or candidacy of another political party without establishing the necessary legal interest.