By Alex Igbekhe
The suit filed by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar to disqualify President Bola Tinubu from the 2027 presidential election suffered a setback on Tuesday as the Federal High Court in Abuja adjourned proceedings over a service issue.
Justice Inyang Ekwo fixed September 28 for further mention after it emerged that the originating summons in the suit had not been personally served on Tinubu. Atiku’s counsel, Joseph Silas, told the court that all attempts to serve the President had failed and applied for substituted service.
But Omosanya Popoola, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria who appeared for Tinubu, stepped forward to accept the court documents on behalf of the President. Popoola asked that Atiku’s team hand over the summons in open court so he could pass it to his client.
The offer, however, sparked a heated exchange between the lawyers as Silas demanded a written undertaking from Popoola confirming that he had the President’s authority to accept service. With the lawyers locked in disagreement, Justice Ekwo adjourned the matter to give Atiku’s team time to regularise service.
Another Senior Advocate, Alex Izinyon, made a final attempt to persuade the court to allow service through Tinubu’s counsel, but the judge stood his ground, insisting on proper service procedures.
Atiku, who is running on the platform of the African Democratic Congress, filed the suit against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress, and the Independent National Electoral Commission. The suit asks the court to decide whether the President is constitutionally qualified to seek reelection in 2027.
The former vice president is relying on Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i), and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, as well as provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026, to press his case.
At the heart of the suit is Atiku’s claim concerning the NYSC discharge certificate submitted to INEC in Tinubu’s name. He argues that the document carries the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” instead of “Bola Ahmed Tinubu” and was filed for both the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
Atiku insists that the certificate was not legitimately obtained by Tinubu and contends that its submission amounts to presenting a forged document, which would trigger automatic disqualification under Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution. He has also called on INEC to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted for the two election cycles.
In his affidavit, the former vice president maintained that the identity and authenticity of the certificate must be settled through evidence.
He argued that if the certificate genuinely belongs to Tinubu, the President should have no difficulty proving that in court.
Beyond the certificate dispute, the suit also takes issue with certain sections of the Electoral Act, 2026, which Atiku says wrongly restrict when a candidate’s qualification can be questioned before an election. He argues that the Act cannot override Section 139(1)(a)(i) of the Constitution, which allows the National Assembly to make laws governing post-election qualification questions.
The plaintiffs want the court to declare that the Electoral Act’s restrictions cannot prevent them from invoking the constitutional disqualification provisions. The suit also seeks an order barring Tinubu and the APC from taking part in the 2027 presidential poll if the allegations are proven.
The suit will resume on September 28.
Discussion about this post