Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has instituted a suit at the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking the disqualification of President Bola Tinubu from contesting the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) certificate.
Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), personally appeared at the court registry on Friday to depose to an affidavit in support of the suit filed against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The suit relies on Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i) and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, alongside relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
At the heart of the legal challenge is Section 137(1)(j), which provides that a person is not qualified for election as president if he has presented a forged certificate to INEC.
Atiku and the ADC are asking the court to determine whether Tinubu should be disqualified if it is established that he submitted a forged NYSC certificate in connection with his presidential candidacy.
According to Atiku’s affidavit, the disputed NYSC discharge certificate bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle”, rather than the President’s name, “Bola Ahmed Tinubu”.
The plaintiffs further allege that the certificate was not obtained by Tinubu and that the document was submitted in connection with the 2027 presidential election.
However, the allegations have not been judicially established.
The court is expected to determine the authenticity of the document and the legal consequences, if any, arising from its use.
Atiku is also asking the court to compel INEC to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted for the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
He said he had previously requested certified true copies of the relevant electoral documents from the commission but had not received them before commencing the legal action.
Explaining his decision to personally appear at the court registry, Atiku said the matter was too important to be treated casually.
“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,” he said.
“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.”
Atiku said he was not seeking to resolve the dispute through political arguments or social media exchanges, insisting that the matter should be determined through evidence before the judiciary.
He also questioned whether the name on the disputed certificate could legally be attributed to Tinubu.
“If the certificate belongs to Bola Ahmed Tinubu, let that be established before the court. If ‘Tinubu Bola Adekunle’ and ‘Bola Ahmed Tinubu’ are one and the same person for the purpose of that certificate, let the evidence establish it,” he said.
The suit further challenges provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 which Atiku and the ADC contend restrict candidates and political parties from challenging the qualification of presidential candidates at the pre-election stage.
The plaintiffs argue that such statutory restrictions cannot override constitutional provisions governing eligibility for the presidency.
They contend that where an Act of the National Assembly conflicts with the Constitution, the Constitution must prevail.
“This case therefore raises a fundamental question for our democracy. Can an Act of the National Assembly be used as a shield against an express provision of the Constitution?” Atiku asked.
He added that the suit seeks to determine whether the alleged restrictions under the Electoral Act can prevent the plaintiffs from invoking Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.
Among the reliefs sought is an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election if the allegations are established.
Atiku maintained that presidential candidates should be subjected to the same standards concerning the authenticity of certificates as other Nigerians.
“The presidency is not an immunity certificate against constitutional scrutiny,” he said.
He also urged INEC to demonstrate its neutrality by producing the relevant electoral records in its custody.
“INEC is holding the documents. The court has the jurisdiction to examine the issues. President Tinubu has the opportunity to defend himself. That is the constitutional process, and nobody should be afraid of it,” Atiku said.
He argued that voters should know the eligibility status of presidential candidates before the 2027 election.
“The 2027 election must begin with clarity about the qualification of those seeking the presidency. Nigerians should not be asked to vote first and investigate later,” he added.
Counsel to the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu, SAN, and Joseph Onu Silas, expressed confidence in the case.
Silas said the legal team had examined the relevant laws and presented its arguments before the court, adding that they were prepared to respond to the defendants’ position after they were served.
“We are confident that justice will prevail. This case presents an important opportunity to further develop Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence,” he said.
The suit introduces another major legal dispute into the political contest ahead of the 2027 presidential election, placing Tinubu’s qualification, the authenticity of the disputed NYSC document and INEC’s electoral records before the judiciary.
Atiku said the broader issue was the equal application of the law, stressing that no individual, including the president, should be exempt from constitutional scrutiny.
“Nobody is above the Constitution, not Atiku Abubakar, not Bola Tinubu, and certainly not the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” he said.
