Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has dragged President Bola Tinubu before the Federal High Court, Abuja, seeking to disqualify him from contesting the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged National Youth Service Corps certificate.
Atiku personally appeared at the court registry on Friday to depose to an affidavit supporting the suit instituted against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress and the Independent National Electoral Commission .
The suit invokes Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i) and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, as well as relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
At the centre of the case is Section 137(1)(j), which provides that a person shall not be qualified for election as President if he has presented a forged certificate to INEC.
Atiku, the presidential candididate of the African Democratic Congress and the party are asking the court to determine whether Tinubu should be disqualified from the 2027 presidential election over the allegation that he submitted a forged NYSC certificate in connection with his presidential candidacy.
According to Atiku’s affidavit, the NYSC discharge certificate allegedly submitted to INEC 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 same document was submitted in connection with the 2027 presidential election.
The allegations have not been judicially established, and the court is now being asked to determine the authenticity and legal implications of the disputed document.
Atiku also wants INEC compelled to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted in connection with the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
The former vice president said he had previously sought certified true copies of the relevant documents from INEC but had not received them before commencing the action.
Explaining his decision to personally appear at the court registry, Atiku said the case was too important to be handled 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.
“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.
Atiku said the case was not intended to be determined through political arguments or social media exchanges, but through evidence presented before the judiciary.
“We are not asking Nigerians to decide this matter on social media, and we are not asking INEC to become a court.
“We are asking the institution holding the records to produce them and the judiciary to examine the evidence and pronounce on it,” the statement read in part.
The ADC presidential candidate also questioned whether the names appearing on the disputed certificate could legitimately 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 added.
The suit also challenges provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 which Atiku and the ADC contend restrict the ability of candidates or political parties to challenge the qualification of presidential candidates at the pre-election stage.
They further argue that the legislation cannot prevent the enforcement of constitutional provisions concerning presidential qualification.
Their position is 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? Can we write into ordinary legislation an escape route from a constitutional standard applicable to everyone seeking the presidency? Our position is that the Constitution remains supreme,” he argued.
The plaintiffs are consequently asking the Federal High Court to determine whether the statutory restrictions complained of can prevent them 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 against them are established.
Atiku argued that the issue of certificate authenticity should be subject to the same standard applicable to ordinary Nigerians.
“The presidency is not an immunity certificate against constitutional scrutiny,” he said.
He also called on INEC to demonstrate its neutrality by producing the relevant electoral records.
“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 added that Nigerians should know the eligibility of presidential candidates before voting.
“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 further said
Counsel to the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu, SAN, and Joseph Onu Silas, expressed confidence in the case.
Silas said the legal team had reviewed the relevant law and presented its arguments before the court, adding that they were prepared to respond to the defendants’ case once 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 legal challenge adds another potentially significant dispute to the political contest ahead of the 2027 presidential election, with Atiku seeking to place Tinubu’s qualification and the handling of his electoral records directly before the judiciary.
The case will now put the spotlight on the disputed NYSC document, INEC’s custody of the relevant nomination records, and the constitutional limits of legislation governing pre-election challenges.
Atiku said the case was ultimately about equal application of the law.
“Nobody is above the Constitution, not Atiku Abubakar, not Bola Tinubu, and certainly not the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” the statement added.
Punch