The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered that President Bola Tinubu be served within seven days with a suit seeking his disqualification from the 2027 presidential election over allegations surrounding a certificate submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
Justice Inyang Ekwo, in a ruling on Wednesday, approved substituted service of the originating processes on Tinubu through his political party, the All Progressives Congress, APC.
The order followed a motion filed by former Vice President and African Democratic Congress, ADC, presidential candidate Atiku Abubakar.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, has Atiku and the ADC as plaintiffs, while Tinubu, the APC and INEC are listed as the first to third defendants.
In an affidavit filed in support of the case, Atiku alleged that Tinubu submitted a forged National Youth Service Corps, NYSC, discharge certificate to INEC as part of his qualification documents.
Atiku claimed that the certificate bore the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” and alleged that it did not belong to the President.
He is asking the court to determine whether the alleged submission of the certificate violated constitutional provisions governing eligibility for the presidency and whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from participating in the 2027 presidential election.
The plaintiffs are also seeking a declaration that Tinubu breached the Constitution by allegedly presenting the certificate when he contested the Lagos State governorship election in 1999.
The court had earlier fixed September 28 for the substantive hearing of the case.
However, INEC has filed processes challenging the competence of the suit and urged the court to dismiss it.
Two Senior Advocates of Nigeria, Chief Akin Olujinmi and Chief Wole Olanipekun, have also separately filed processes in the matter on behalf of Tinubu.
Both lawyers challenged the competence of the suit and Atiku’s legal standing to question the documents submitted by Tinubu to INEC, relying on provisions of Section 29(5) of the Electoral Act 2026.
In a counter-affidavit, Olujinmi argued that the case was statute-barred, contending that the documents were submitted to INEC before August 1 and that the 14-day period provided for such litigation had expired.
He also argued that Atiku, as a member of the ADC, lacked the legal standing to challenge actions involving the APC.
Olanipekun, who also identified himself as Tinubu’s lawyer, filed a preliminary objection and counter-affidavit seeking dismissal of the suit, describing it as incompetent and an abuse of court process.
In a September 10 letter to the Deputy Chief Registrar of the court, Olanipekun said Tinubu had instructed him to lead a legal team to defend his interests in the case.
He complained that the President had not been personally served with the originating processes and requested either the service copy or a certified true copy to enable the defence to respond.
The plaintiffs have also applied to amend parts of the suit, including correcting the name of the INEC form to which the alleged certificate was attached. They said the form was wrongly identified as Form CF001 instead of Form EC9.