Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, ADC, and the party have asked the Federal High Court in Abuja for permission to amend their suit against President Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress, APC.
The plaintiffs are seeking an order allowing them to amend their originating summons in a case challenging Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election. The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, names Tinubu, APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, as the first, second and third defendants respectively.
Atiku and the ADC are asking Justice Inyang Ekwo to disqualify Tinubu and APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election over claims concerning the submission of a National Youth Service Corps, NYSC, discharge certificate to INEC.
However, Tinubu and APC have asked the court to dismiss the suit, arguing that it is incompetent and that the plaintiffs lack the legal right to institute the action.
In a joint counter-affidavit filed on Sept. 9, the defendants denied submitting any forged certificate to INEC for either the 2023 or 2027 presidential elections.
Through APC’s Director of Legal Services, Mr. Sanusi Samaila, the defendants also said they did not submit Form CF001 to INEC for the 2023 or 2027 election as claimed by the plaintiffs.
They further maintained that the NYSC had never denied issuing a discharge certificate to Tinubu at the end of his service.
The defendants argued that no constitutional provision had been breached and that no injustice had been done to the plaintiffs by the submission of the president’s personal particulars to INEC.
In a written address filed alongside the application by Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, the defendants raised several objections to the suit.
Olujinmi argued that since the plaintiffs’ complaint centres on forgery, which constitutes a criminal allegation, it must be established beyond reasonable doubt under Section 135(1) of the Evidence Act.
Also Read:Â Tinubu, APC ask court to dismiss forgery suit by Atiku
He also argued that evidence from the institution alleged to have issued the disputed certificate would be necessary to establish that the document was forged.
According to the lawyer, Atiku and the ADC had not produced evidence from the NYSC Directorate disclaiming the issuance of the discharge certificate to Tinubu.
He therefore described the suit as hypothetical and academic, arguing that it lacked the factual basis required for the court to grant the reliefs sought.
Olujinmi also described the case as an incompetent pre-election matter and argued that the plaintiffs lacked the locus standi to challenge Tinubu’s candidacy under the APC.
Meanwhile, Atiku and the ADC have filed a motion on notice seeking leave to amend their originating summons. The plaintiffs said they discovered some errors after filing the suit on Aug. 14, particularly the nomenclature of the INEC forms attached to their affidavit. They explained that the form was referred to as Form CF001, instead of the current Form EC9A.
They also said there was a need to set out more specifically the particulars of the alleged fraud in their affidavit, provide a written deposition by Atiku and attach clearer copies of some exhibits referenced in the case.
The plaintiffs argued that the amendments were necessary in the interest of justice and asked the court to deem the amended originating summons as properly filed and served. The court has fixed Sept. 28 for hearing in the case.
NAN
