Court Adjourns Suit Seeking Tinubu’s Disqualification, Warns Against Media Trial

• The Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned until September 28 further proceedings in a suit seeking to disqualify President Bola Tinubu from the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged NYSC discharge certificate.

• Justice Inyang Ekwo, while adjourning the matter, warned the parties and their lawyers against discussing the case in the media or on social media, saying he would hold counsel responsible and take “very drastic action” if the warning was breached.

• The suit was filed by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and the African Democratic Congress (ADC), who allege that Tinubu submitted a certificate bearing the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” to INEC and provided false information about himself.

• Atiku and the ADC are asking the court to declare that the alleged presentation of the certificate breached constitutional provisions and to bar Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election.

September 01, () — The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has adjourned until September 28 further proceedings in a suit seeking the disqualification of President Bola Tinubu from the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate.

Justice Inyang Ekwo fixed the date on Tuesday after lawyers to the parties appeared before the court and disagreed over the mode of service of the court processes on President Tinubu.

Marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, the suit was instituted by former Vice President and presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, with the ADC joined as the second plaintiff.

Tinubu, his political party, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) are listed as the first, second and third defendants respectively.

The plaintiffs are challenging Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election, alleging that he presented a forged NYSC certificate to INEC and supplied false information in the documents submitted to the electoral body.

In a 25-paragraph affidavit personally deposed to by Atiku in support of the suit, the former vice president alleged that Tinubu submitted a bogus NYSC discharge certificate to INEC to support his qualification to contest for the presidency.

Atiku drew the court’s attention to the certificate allegedly submitted by Tinubu, which bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle.”

He argued that the name on the document was different from the President’s actual name and alleged that the certificate belonged to another person.

“I know that the NYSC certificate is clearly not one obtained by the 1st defendant, as it belongs to one Adekunle,” Atiku stated, adding that the alleged certificate was attached to his affidavit as Exhibit P2.

“I know that the said NYSC certificate is still in existence and in the custody of the 3rd defendant (INEC) and that it is a forgery, as the 1st defendant’s name is not Adekunle, and yet he submitted it to the 3rd defendant to be acted upon as genuine,” he averred.

Atiku further alleged that Tinubu had been parading the disputed certificate since 1999, when he contested the Lagos State governorship election.

The plaintiffs are asking the court to determine whether, in view of the limitations contained in Sections 138(1)(a) and (b) of the Electoral Act, 2026, and Section 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, they are entitled to enforce Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution against Tinubu.

They also want the court to determine whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from participating in the 2027 presidential election for allegedly presenting a forged NYSC certificate to INEC in relation to the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.

Among the reliefs sought is a declaration that Tinubu presented a forged certificate to INEC when he contested the Lagos State governorship election in 1999 and thereby breached Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.

The plaintiffs are also seeking an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election based on the alleged presentation of the forged certificate.

Service Dispute Delays Proceedings

When the case was called on Tuesday, a team of lawyers led by Omosanya Popoola announced appearance for President Tinubu.

However, counsel to Atiku and the ADC, Joseph Onu, informed the court that the plaintiffs had been unable to serve Tinubu personally with a copy of the suit.

Although Popoola told the court that he had the President’s authority to represent him, Onu insisted that, given the sensitive nature of the case, the plaintiffs wanted to personally serve Tinubu with the court processes or obtain an order permitting substituted service.

“My lord, this is a very important case, and we do not want to leave any chance for a technicality. We do not want to fall into any trap,” Onu told the court, adding that the plaintiffs would accept service through Tinubu’s counsel if there was a written undertaking from the President authorising his lawyers to receive the processes on his behalf.

“But if we have a written undertaking from the 1st defendant to be served through counsel, we will accept,” he said.

INEC’s counsel, Dr Alex Iziyon, SAN, however, urged the court to reject the demand for personal service, arguing that the appearance of Tinubu’s counsel was sufficient indication that the President had notice of the proceedings.

The commission also pressed for an expedited hearing of the matter, noting that more than 17 days had elapsed since the suit was filed.

Iziyon told the court that the electoral commission was ready to file its defence within 10 days.

Judge Warns Against Media Trial

After listening to the submissions, Justice Ekwo held that he could not dictate to the plaintiffs how they should conduct their case. The judge subsequently adjourned the matter until September 28 for mention.

Before rising, however, Justice Ekwo issued a stern warning to the parties and their lawyers against discussing the substance of the case outside the courtroom, particularly on social media.

The judge said the case must be conducted in court rather than through conventional or social media platforms.

“This case is to be conducted in the court and not in the media, whether it is regular or social. If this case is discussed on social media, I will hold counsel for the party responsible, and I will take very drastic action,” Justice Ekwo warned.