2027: Atiku asks court to disqualify Tinubu over alleged NYSC certificate discrepancy

Presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to disqualify President Bola Ahmed Tinubu from contesting the 2027 presidential election over an alleged discrepancy in an NYSC certificate submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Atiku personally appeared at the court registry on Friday to depose to an affidavit in support of the suit challenging Tinubu’s qualification for the election.

This was contained in a statement issued by Atiku’s Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu.

The suit, filed by Atiku and the ADC against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and INEC, invokes, among other provisions, Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i) and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, as well as relevant provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.

At the centre of the suit is Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution, which provides that a person shall not be qualified for election as President if he has presented a forged certificate to INEC.

According to the statement, the plaintiffs are asking the court to determine whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from the 2027 presidential election over the allegation that Tinubu presented a forged NYSC certificate to INEC in connection with the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.

Speaking after deposing to the affidavit, Atiku said his decision to appear personally was deliberate.

“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. 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,” he said.

In the affidavit, Atiku alleged that Tinubu submitted to INEC an NYSC discharge certificate bearing the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle”, which, according to the plaintiffs, differs from the President’s name, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

The affidavit further alleges that the same NYSC certificate was submitted in connection with the 2027 presidential election and contends that the document was not obtained by Tinubu.

The statement said Atiku had also put INEC on notice to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted in connection with the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.

It said Atiku had applied for certified true copies of the relevant forms before filing the suit but had not received a response when the court processes were prepared.

Atiku said the matter should be determined by the court rather than through public debate.

“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,” he said.

He added: “If the certificate belongs to Bola Ahmed Tinubu, let that be established before the court. If ‘Tinubu Bola Adekunle’ and ‘Bola Ahmed Tinubu’ are one and the same person for the purpose of that certificate, let the evidence establish it.”

Challenge to Electoral Act
Beyond the certificate issue, Atiku and the ADC are also challenging provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026, which they contend restrict the circumstances under which a candidate’s qualification can be challenged at the pre-election stage.

According to the statement, the plaintiffs also contend that the legislation effectively removes qualification as a ground for questioning an election, contrary to Section 139(1)(a)(i) of the Constitution.

The plaintiffs argue that legislation cannot be used to prevent the enforcement of an express constitutional provision, maintaining that where an Act of the National Assembly conflicts with the Constitution, the Constitution should prevail.

Atiku described the case as raising a fundamental constitutional question about the supremacy of the Constitution.

“Can an Act of the National Assembly be used as a shield against an express provision of the Constitution? Can we write into ordinary legislation an escape route from a constitutional standard applicable to everyone seeking the Presidency? Our position is that the Constitution remains supreme,” he said.

The statement said the originating summons is asking the Federal High Court to determine whether the statutory restrictions challenged by the plaintiffs can prevent them from invoking Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.

It said the plaintiffs are ultimately seeking an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election if their case is established.

Atiku said the issue of qualification should be settled before Nigerians go to the polls.
“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.

He also called on INEC to demonstrate its neutrality by making the relevant records available to the court.

“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. The 2027 election must begin with clarity about the qualification of those seeking the Presidency,” Atiku said.

He said his personal appearance to depose to the affidavit demonstrated his willingness to submit himself to the same constitutional standards he was demanding of others.

“This is not about privilege, personalities or presidential power. It is about one Constitution and one standard for every Nigerian. Nobody is above the Constitution — not Atiku Abubakar, not Bola Tinubu, and certainly not the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” he said.

Counsel to the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu, SAN, and Joseph Onu Silas, Esq., expressed confidence in the case.

Speaking on behalf of the legal team, Silas said they had carefully reviewed the law and presented their arguments before the court, adding that they were prepared to respond to the defendants’ case once served.

The suit comes ahead of the 2027 presidential election and places before the Federal High Court questions concerning presidential qualification, the presentation of certificates to INEC and the extent to which electoral legislation can regulate constitutional grounds for challenging a candidate’s eligibility. The allegations contained in Atiku’s suit remain subject to determination by the court.