Atiku’s Suit: Tinubu denies submitting fake NYSC Certification to INEC

Stay Connected

Follow Very Nigerian

Get the latest Nigerian news, trending stories and breaking updates directly on WhatsApp.

Join Our Channel →

President Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) have asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a suit seeking to disqualify them from participating in the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate.

The suit was filed by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), and the ADC.

The plaintiffs are challenging Tinubu’s eligibility over allegations that a disputed NYSC discharge certificate was submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, lists Tinubu, the APC and INEC as the first, second and third defendants respectively.

Atiku and the ADC are asking the court to disqualify Tinubu and the APC and direct INEC to remove their names from the list of presidential candidates and political parties participating in the 2027 election.

However, Tinubu and the APC, in their response, denied submitting any forged certificate to INEC in connection with either the 2023 or 2027 presidential election.

Meanwhile, Justice Inyang Ekwo has granted Atiku permission to serve the court processes on Tinubu through the APC after the plaintiffs told the court that attempts to personally serve the President had been unsuccessful.

The judge granted the order on Wednesday following an ex parte application argued by Atiku’s counsel, Olanrewaju Omotayo-Ojo.

Justice Ekwo directed that the court processes be served on Tinubu through the APC within seven days and subsequently adjourned the case until September 28 for further proceedings.

Moving the application, Omotayo-Ojo told the court that substituted service had become necessary because the originating summons and other processes had not been personally served on the President.

The issue of service had previously delayed proceedings, with the plaintiffs maintaining that they either wanted to personally serve Tinubu or obtain a court order permitting substituted service.

In their joint counter-affidavit, Tinubu and the APC denied the allegation that they submitted a forged NYSC discharge certificate to INEC.

The counter-affidavit, deposed to by APC Director of Legal Services, Sanusi Samaila, also disputed the claim that Tinubu or the party submitted Form CF001 to INEC in relation to either the 2023 or 2027 presidential election.

The defendants maintained that the NYSC had not disowned the discharge certificate issued to Tinubu.

They further argued that the submission of the President’s personal particulars to the electoral commission did not violate any constitutional provision.

In a written address filed on behalf of Tinubu and the APC, their counsel, Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, argued that an allegation of forgery is criminal in nature and must therefore be established beyond reasonable doubt under Section 135(1) of the Evidence Act.

Olujinmi contended that where a document is alleged to have been forged, evidence from the institution purported to have issued the document would be crucial to establishing the allegation.

He argued that Atiku and the ADC had not produced any disclaimer from the NYSC denying that it issued the discharge certificate attributed to Tinubu.

The defence also argued that the plaintiffs failed to produce the original document from which the alleged forgery was supposedly made alongside the disputed certificate.

On these grounds, Tinubu and the APC described the action as hypothetical and lacking sufficient material facts to sustain the claims.

They further challenged the competence of the suit as a pre-election matter and argued that Atiku and the ADC lacked the legal standing to challenge Tinubu’s emergence as the APC’s presidential candidate.

INEC has also challenged the competence of the suit.

In a preliminary objection filed through its counsel, Alex Izinyon, the electoral commission urged the court to dismiss the case.

INEC argued, among other grounds, that the suit was statute-barred and that Atiku and the ADC lacked the legal standing to institute the action.

The commission also contended that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action and amounted to an abuse of court process.

INEC further challenged the plaintiffs’ alleged compliance with the Federal High Court Pre-Election Practice Directions, particularly requirements relating to written depositions.

The electoral commission also opposed some of the reliefs sought by Atiku and the ADC and urged the court to strike out the suit.

The matter is now scheduled to return before Justice Ekwo on September 28 for further proceedings, with the court expected to consider the various issues raised by the parties over the competence of the suit and the allegations surrounding the disputed NYSC certificate.