Court Adjourns Suit Seeking Tinubu’s Disqualification from 2027 Presidential Race

ABUJA — The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has adjourned further proceedings in a suit seeking to disqualify President Bola Ahmed Tinubu from contesting the 2027 presidential election.
Justice Inyang Ekwo fixed September 28, 2026, for the next mention of the case after lawyers representing the parties failed to reach an agreement on the procedure for serving court processes on the President.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, was instituted by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) against President Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
At the centre of the legal battle is an allegation concerning the NYSC discharge certificate allegedly submitted by Tinubu to INEC as part of his qualification documents for the presidential election.
Atiku, in the suit, alleges that the certificate presented to the electoral commission is bogus and bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” rather than the President’s recognised name, “Bola Ahmed Tinubu.” The plaintiffs contend that the alleged discrepancy raises fundamental questions about the authenticity and validity of the document submitted to INEC.
In a 25-paragraph affidavit, Atiku urged the court to apply relevant provisions of the 1999 Constitution, including Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i) and 285(14)(c), alongside provisions of the Electoral Act 2026.
The former vice president argued that the submission of a forged or fraudulent certificate to INEC constitutes a constitutional ground for disqualification from seeking the office of President.
He consequently asked the court to prevent Tinubu from participating in the 2027 presidential election and to bar the APC from presenting him as its presidential candidate should the allegations be established.
However, the substantive proceedings could not proceed as expected following a disagreement over service of the originating court processes on the President.
Atiku’s counsel, Joseph Onu Silas, told the court that he had been unable to personally serve President Tinubu with the relevant processes.
Tinubu’s counsel, Omosanya Popoola, SAN, indicated his willingness to accept service on behalf of the President. The plaintiffs’ legal team, however, requested a written undertaking before handing over the processes.
The disagreement ultimately stalled proceedings, prompting Justice Ekwo to adjourn the matter.
The judge reportedly directed the plaintiffs to “put their house in order” before the next date and cautioned the parties against turning the courtroom dispute into a media trial.
The September 28 sitting is therefore expected to clarify the disputed issue of service and determine the next procedural steps in the case.
The suit comes as political parties and presidential hopefuls intensify preparations for the 2027 general elections, with questions surrounding candidates’ constitutional qualifications and documents submitted to INEC increasingly becoming the subject of legal and political scrutiny.
For now, the allegations against President Tinubu remain claims before the court and have not been judicially established. The eventual determination of the case will depend on the evidence presented and the court’s interpretation of the relevant constitutional and electoral provisions.