JamzNG Latest News, Gist, Entertainment in Nigeria
The Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned to September 28 for further proceedings on a lawsuit filed by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar seeking to challenge President Bola Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election over allegations relating to his NYSC certificate.
The lawsuit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, was filed by Atiku, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), with the party joining as a second plaintiff.
President Tinubu is listed as the first defendant, while the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) are the second and third defendants respectively.
Atiku, in a 25-paragraph written statement which he personally withdrew in support of the action, accused President Tinubu of submitting a fake National Youth Service Corps discharge certificate to INEC as part of his qualification documents.
The former vice president drew the court’s attention to the name on the certificate allegedly submitted to the election commission, insisting that it raised questions about its authenticity.
“I know that the NYSC certificate clearly does not belong to the first defendant, because it belongs to Adekunle.
“The said NYSC certificate under the name of Tinubu Bola Adekunle, is hereby attached and marked as Exhibit P2.
“I know that the NYSC certificate is still there and in the custody of the 3rd defendant (INEC) and is fake because the name of the 1st defendant is not Adekunle, but he handed it over to the 3rd defendant for further action,” Atiku stressed.
The plaintiff further alleged that the certificate had been used by Tinubu since 1999 when he first ran for governor of Lagos State.
In their lawsuit, Atiku and the ADC asked the court to resolve several constitutional and electoral questions, including whether they are entitled to invoke constitutional provisions regarding the qualifications of Presidential candidates.
Also read: NFF denies alleged threat of FIFA sanctions, insists football reform continues as planned
They specifically asked the court to determine: “Whether, in view of the limitations in section 138(1)(a) & (b) of the 2026 Elections Act, and section 285(14)(c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended), the Plaintiff shall not be permitted to enforce the binding provisions of section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended), which applies, mutatis mutandis, to all candidates who aspires to the office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
The plaintiff also wants the court to decide: “Whether the 1st and 2nd Defendants should be disqualified for presenting fake NYSC certificates to the 3rd Defendant for the 2023 and 2027 Presidential Elections, in violation of Article 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”
Among the reliefs sought, Atiku and the ADC asked the court to declare that Tinubu provided false certificates when he contested the 1999 Lagos State gubernatorial election.
They also sought: “A declaration that the 1st Defendant presented a fake certificate to the 3rd Defendant when he ran for Governor of Lagos State in 1999 and thereby violated the provisions of section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended).”
The plaintiffs equally requested: “An order disqualifying Defendants I and II from contesting in the 2027 Presidential Election for presenting false certificates to Defendant III when Defendant I ran for Governor of Lagos State in 1999.”
When the matter arose on Tuesday, a team of lawyers led by Omosanya Popoola announced their presence before President Tinubu.
However, Atiku’s attorney, Joseph Onu, told the court that the plaintiff had not personally served the President in the court proceedings.
Although Popoola told the court that he had the authority to represent Tinubu, Onu insisted that his client wanted to ensure proper service, given what he described as the importance and sensitivity of the case.
“My lord, this is a very important case, and we don’t want to leave any chance for technical problems. We don’t want to fall into any traps. We don’t want to let this problem happen again.”
“But if we have a written promise from the first defendant to convey it through legal counsel, we will accept it,” said Onu.
INEC lawyer, Dr Alex Iziyon, SAN, opposed the push for personal service, arguing that the presence of legal counsel representing the President was sufficient.
He also urged the court to speed up the trial process on this matter, considering that more than 17 days had passed since the lawsuit was filed.
INEC, according to its attorney, is ready to submit a defense within 10 days.
After hearing submissions from the parties, Justice Inyang Ekwo stated that the court cannot dictate to plaintiffs how they should try their cases.
The judge then adjourned the case until September 28 for further proceedings.
However, Judge Ekwo issued a strong warning to all parties and their lawyers not to bring the substance of this case to the media while it is still in court.
“This case must be carried out in court and not in the media, both regular and social cases.
“If this case is discussed on social media, I will ask the legal representatives of the parties responsible, and I will take very drastic action,” Justice Ekwo warned.
The lawsuit is expected to attract significant political and legal attention as Nigeria gradually moves towards the 2027 general elections, with Atiku and the ADC seeking judicial interpretation of the issues surrounding President Tinubu’s suitability to run for president again.
