The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed September 28 for further proceedings in a suit by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar seeking to stop President Bola Tinubu from contesting the 2027 presidential election.
The case centres on allegations by Atiku and his political party, the African Democratic Congress (ADC), that a document submitted by Tinubu to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) contains false information.
The suit, numbered FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, names Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and INEC as the first, second and third defendants respectively.
What Atiku Is Challenging
In a 25-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the case, Atiku alleged discrepancies in the NYSC discharge certificate submitted by Tinubu alongside his electoral documents.
The plaintiffs contend that the certificate submitted in Form CF0001 bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle”, which they argue amounts to the submission of false information under Nigeria’s electoral laws.
Based on that allegation, Atiku and the ADC are asking the court to declare that Tinubu’s action falls foul of Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.
They are also seeking an order preventing Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election.
Service of Court Documents Becomes Key Issue
Tuesday’s proceedings focused largely on the question of service.
Omosanya Popoola appeared for President Tinubu, despite Atiku’s lawyer, Joseph Onu, telling the court that the plaintiffs had encountered difficulties personally serving the President with the relevant documents.
Popoola told the court that his legal team had the authority to accept service on Tinubu’s behalf.
INEC’s lawyer, Dr Alex Iziyon, SAN, also urged the court to move quickly with the hearing.
The plaintiffs, however, sought additional procedural safeguards. Their counsel requested written undertakings or an order permitting substituted service to minimise the possibility of future objections over whether the defendants had been properly served.
Judge Orders Parties to Keep Case Out of Media
Justice Inyang Ekwo ultimately adjourned the matter for mention on September 28, declining to dictate how the plaintiffs should carry out service.
The judge also issued a strong warning against public discussion of the case.
Justice Ekwo directed the parties and their lawyers not to debate the ongoing litigation through news organisations or social media platforms.
The judge stressed that the dispute must be argued in court rather than in the public arena, warning that counsel could face serious consequences if the case is discussed on social media.
The order adds another layer to a politically sensitive legal battle that could have significant implications for the 2027 presidential contest if Atiku’s claims ultimately succeed.