Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and the African Democratic Congress, ADC, have approached the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking the disqualification of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu from participating in the 2027 presidential election over allegations concerning the authenticity of an NYSC discharge certificate submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
Atiku, the ADC presidential candidate, personally appeared at the court registry on Friday, August 14, 2026, where he deposed to an affidavit in support of the action.
The suit was instituted by Atiku and the ADC against President Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress, APC, and INEC.
The plaintiffs are relying, among other provisions, on Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i) and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, as well as provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.
Central to the action is Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution, which provides for the disqualification of a person seeking election to the office of President where that person has presented a forged certificate to INEC.
Atiku and the ADC are asking the court to determine whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from the 2027 presidential election on the basis of their allegation that an NYSC discharge certificate submitted to INEC bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle.”
According to Atiku’s affidavit, the name on the disputed document differs from “Bola Ahmed Tinubu,” by which the President is publicly known.
The plaintiffs further allege that the same NYSC certificate was submitted in connection with the 2027 presidential election and contend that the document was not obtained by Tinubu.
The allegations have now been formally placed before the Federal High Court for judicial determination and have not been established by the court.
Speaking after deposing to the affidavit, Atiku said his decision to appear personally at the court registry was intended to demonstrate the seriousness he attached to the constitutional questions raised in the action.
“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,” Atiku said.
“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.”
The former Vice President also asked INEC to produce the records relating to the forms submitted by Tinubu in connection with the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
According to the plaintiffs, Atiku had applied for certified true copies of the relevant Form CF001 records but had not received them before the court processes were prepared.
Atiku maintained that the dispute should be determined by the judiciary on the basis of evidence rather than through political arguments or social media exchanges.
“This is precisely why we have gone to court. We are not asking Nigerians to decide this matter on social media, and we are not asking INEC to become a court,” he said.
“We are asking the institution holding the records to produce them and the judiciary to examine the evidence and pronounce on it.
“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.”
Beyond the disputed certificate, Atiku and the ADC are also challenging provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026, which they contend restrict the category of persons who may challenge a candidate’s qualification at the pre-election stage and affect qualification as a ground upon which a presidential election may be questioned.
Their position is that an Act of the National Assembly cannot override or prevent the enforcement of an express provision of the Constitution.
Atiku said the action raises the broader question of whether ordinary legislation could operate as a shield against constitutional requirements imposed on persons seeking election as President.
“Our position is that the Constitution remains supreme,” he said.
The originating summons consequently asks the Federal High Court to determine whether the statutory restrictions complained of can prevent the plaintiffs from invoking Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.
Among the substantive reliefs sought is an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election should the court uphold the allegations and legal arguments presented by the plaintiffs.
Atiku maintained that persons seeking the highest political office in the country should be subjected to the same scrutiny over their credentials as other Nigerians.
“Nigerian graduates cannot complete NYSC documentation with one identity and simply ask employers to ignore discrepancies,” he said.
“The Presidency is not an immunity certificate against constitutional scrutiny.”
He further urged INEC to demonstrate neutrality by making the relevant records available to the court, saying the electoral body has a responsibility to uphold the Constitution irrespective of whose political interest may be affected.
“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.
“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.”
Counsel to the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu, SAN, and Joseph Onu Silas, Esq., expressed confidence in the legal action, saying the team had reviewed the applicable laws and was prepared to respond to the defendants when processes are served.
Silas maintained that the action was concerned with the application of constitutional standards rather than the status or personalities of the parties involved.
In a related development, Nigerian lawyer Kalu Kalu, Esq., has submitted a petition to the European Commission in Brussels raising separate allegations concerning President Tinubu’s qualifications and what he described as threats to Nigeria’s constitutional order.
The development was publicised on Friday by Paul Ibe, Media Adviser to Atiku.
Speaking at the European Commission headquarters, Kalu said the petition was intended to seek international attention over what he described as the “subversion of constitutional order” in Nigeria.
