Former Vice President and presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has taken his battle with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu into the courtroom, asking the Federal High Court in Abuja to determine whether alleged discrepancies in the President’s NYSC certificate should affect his eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election.
In a move that could open a fresh legal front ahead of the 2027 polls, Atiku personally appeared at the court registry on Friday to depose to an affidavit supporting the suit filed jointly with the ADC against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The case goes beyond the disputed certificate, however, as Atiku is also challenging provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026, which he argues could restrict the ability of citizens to invoke constitutional provisions on presidential qualification before an election.
At the centre of the suit is Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution, which provides that a person is not qualified for election as President if he presents a forged certificate to INEC.
Atiku is asking the court to determine whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from the 2027 presidential election if the allegations concerning the NYSC certificate are established.
In his affidavit, Atiku alleges that an NYSC discharge certificate bearing the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” was submitted to INEC in connection with the presidential election, contending that the name differs from that of the President, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
The plaintiffs further allege that the document was also submitted in connection with the 2027 election and maintain that it was not a certificate obtained by Tinubu.
Rather than asking Nigerians to settle the dispute politically, Atiku said he had chosen the judicial route to allow the relevant documents and evidence to be tested under the law.
“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.”
A potentially significant aspect of the case is Atiku’s demand that INEC produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted for the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
The former Vice President said he had previously applied for certified true copies of the relevant documents but had not received a response before filing the suit.
He argued that the court, rather than political actors or social media commentators, should determine the authenticity and legal implications of the documents.
“This is precisely why we have gone to court. 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,” Atiku said.
He added that if the disputed names referred to the same person for purposes of the certificate, the evidence should establish that fact before the court.
The suit also raises a broader constitutional battle over whether provisions of the Electoral Act can restrict access to a constitutional remedy.
Atiku and the ADC argue that Section 139(1)(a)(i) of the Constitution empowers the National Assembly to make laws concerning challenges to the qualification of a person elected President, but contend that ordinary legislation cannot override an express constitutional provision.
The plaintiffs are therefore asking the court to determine whether the statutory restrictions contained in the 2026 Electoral Act can prevent them from invoking Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.
For Atiku, the issue is ultimately about whether constitutional standards should apply equally to everyone seeking the nation’s highest political office.
“Nigerian graduates cannot complete NYSC documentation with one identity and simply ask employers to ignore discrepancies. 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,” he said.
“The Presidency is not an immunity certificate against constitutional scrutiny.”
The former Vice President also placed responsibility on INEC to demonstrate its neutrality by producing the relevant electoral documents and allowing the court to examine them.
“INEC is holding the documents. The court has the jurisdiction to examine the issues. President Tinubu has the opportunity to defend himself. That is the constitutional process, and nobody should be afraid of it,” he said.
Atiku maintained that the 2027 election should not proceed without clarity on the eligibility of those seeking the presidency.
“Nigerians should not be asked to vote first and investigate later,” he said.
The plaintiffs are ultimately seeking an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election if the allegations pleaded before the court are established.
Counsel to the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu, SAN, and Joseph Onu Silas, expressed confidence in the case, saying the legal team had carefully examined the relevant constitutional and electoral provisions.
Speaking for the team, Silas Onu said the case could provide an opportunity for the courts to further develop Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence.
“This is not about privilege, personalities or presidential power. It is about one Constitution and one standard for every Nigerian,” he said.
“Nobody is above the Constitution — not Atiku Abubakar, not Bola Tinubu, and certainly not the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”