Atiku Abubakar, former Vice President, has dragged President Bola Tinubu before the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking his disqualification from 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 supporting the suit filed against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The suit invokes, among other provisions, 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 suit is Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution, 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 and the APC should be disqualified from the 2027 presidential election over allegations that Tinubu presented a forged NYSC certificate in connection with the 2023 and 2027 elections.
Explaining his decision to personally depose to the affidavit, Atiku said the matter was too fundamental 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 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,’ he added.
In the affidavit, Atiku alleged that Tinubu submitted to INEC an NYSC discharge certificate bearing the name ‘Tinubu Bola Adekunle’, which the plaintiffs contend differs from the President’s name, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The affidavit further alleges that the certificate was submitted in connection with the 2027 presidential election and maintains that the document was not obtained by Tinubu.
Atiku also wants INEC compelled to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted for the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
According to the affidavit, Atiku had applied for certified true copies of the relevant documents before instituting the suit but had not received a response when the processes were prepared.
‘This is precisely why we have gone to court,’ Atiku said.
‘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.
‘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.
Beyond the certificate allegation, Atiku and the ADC are challenging provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 which they argue restrict the ability to challenge a candidate’s qualification at the pre-election stage.
They contend that ordinary legislation cannot override or undermine an express constitutional provision, arguing 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,’ Atiku said.
‘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 added.
The plaintiffs are consequently asking the Federal High Court to determine whether the statutory restrictions contained in the Electoral Act can prevent them from invoking Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.
They are also seeking an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election if the allegations against them are established.
‘Nobody should misunderstand what is at stake. Nigerian graduates cannot complete NYSC documentation with one identity and simply ask employers to ignore discrepancies,’ he said.
‘Young Nigerians seeking ordinary jobs are subjected to rigorous scrutiny of their certificates. The standard cannot suddenly disappear because the applicant is seeking the highest office in the land. The Presidency is not an immunity certificate against constitutional scrutiny,’ he added.
He further urged INEC to demonstrate its neutrality by making the relevant documents available to the court.
Counsel to the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu, (SAN), and Joseph Onu Silas, expressed confidence in their case.
Speaking for the legal team, Silas said they had carefully reviewed the relevant laws and presented their arguments before the court, adding that they were prepared to respond to the defendants’ case once served.
‘We are confident that justice will prevail. This case presents an important opportunity to further develop Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence,’ he said.
‘This is not about privilege, personalities or presidential power. It is about one Constitution and one standard for every Nigerian.
‘Nobody is above the Constitution – not Atiku Abubakar, not Bola Tinubu, and certainly not the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,’ he said.