The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has ordered that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu be served within seven days with a suit filed by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar challenging his eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election.
The suit, which centres on allegations concerning certificates submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), was considered by Justice Inyang Ekwo, who granted an order for substituted service on the President.
Under the order, the legal processes are to be served on Tinubu through his political party, the All Progressives Congress (APC).
The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, was instituted by Atiku, while the African Democratic Congress (ADC) was joined as the second plaintiff.
President Tinubu, the APC and INEC were listed as the first, second and third defendants respectively.
In a 25-paragraph affidavit personally deposed to by Atiku, the former Vice President alleged that Tinubu submitted a forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate to INEC.
According to the allegation contained in the affidavit, the certificate bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle.”
Atiku is asking the court to determine whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from participating in the 2027 presidential election on the basis of the alleged submission of a forged certificate.
The court had earlier fixed September 28 for the commencement of hearing in the substantive matter.
However, INEC has filed processes challenging the competence of the suit and asking the court to dismiss the case.
Meanwhile, two Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs), Chief Akin Olujinmi and Chief Wole Olanipekun, have separately filed processes indicating that they are representing President Tinubu in the matter.
Both senior lawyers have challenged the competence of the suit as well as Atiku’s legal standing, or locus standi, to institute the case.
The plaintiffs have also applied to amend portions of the suit. Among the proposed amendments is a correction to the name of the INEC form to which the alleged certificate was attached, with the plaintiffs seeking to change the reference from Form CF001 to Form EC9.
The court’s decision on the various preliminary challenges and applications will determine how the substantive suit proceeds ahead of the scheduled September 28 hearing.
