TD Former Vice President and presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has instituted a fresh legal challenge against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, asking the Federal High Court in Abuja to disqualify him from contesting the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate.
Atiku and the ADC filed the suit on Friday, August 14, 2026, joining the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as defendants.
Atiku also personally appeared at the court registry to depose to an affidavit supporting the case.
The suit centres on an NYSC discharge certificate which Atiku alleges was submitted by Tinubu to INEC and bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle”, rather than “Bola Ahmed Tinubu.”
According to the plaintiffs, the certificate was not legitimately obtained by Tinubu and was used in connection with his presidential candidacy.
They are asking the court to determine whether the alleged document amounts to the presentation of a forged certificate.
They also asked the court to determine, if established, whether Tinubu should consequently be disqualified from the 2027 presidential election.
Atiku invokes Section 137 of the Constitution
A central plank of the lawsuit is Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, which provides that a person is not qualified for election as President if he has presented a forged certificate to INEC.
The plaintiffs are also relying on other constitutional provisions and the Electoral Act 2026 in challenging Tinubu’s eligibility.
Atiku is seeking an order compelling INEC to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 and related records submitted for the 2023 and 2027 presidential election processes.
The former vice-president said he had previously requested certified copies of relevant documents from INEC but had not received them before commencing the action.
Explaining his decision to personally depose to the affidavit, Atiku said the case concerns constitutional requirements for occupying the nation’s highest elective office.
He argued that the matter should ultimately be determined through documentary evidence and judicial scrutiny rather than political arguments or social-media exchanges.
Certificate controversy dates back to 2023
The latest lawsuit revives a controversy that featured prominently during the litigation surrounding the 2023 presidential election.
In June 2023, the Presidential Election Petition Court admitted into evidence certified copies of several documents tendered by Atiku and the PDP.
This includes an NYSC discharge certificate bearing the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle.”
The respondents, including Tinubu, APC and INEC, objected to the admission of the documents.
Atiku’s legal team subsequently highlighted the discrepancy between the name on the NYSC document and the name under which Tinubu contested the election.
The controversy also became intertwined with the former vice-president’s efforts to obtain records from Chicago State University, which were examined during the 2023 election litigation.
The existence of a different name on an official document, however, does not by itself establish forgery.
The new lawsuit places the allegations before a court for determination, and Tinubu has not been judicially found guilty of forging the NYSC certificate merely because the document carries a different name.
APC dismisses suit
The APC has rejected the lawsuit, describing it as an exercise in futility.
APC National Secretary Ajibola Basiru told Saturday PUNCH that Tinubu remains qualified to contest the election and argued that the issue had already been settled by the Supreme Court.
Basiru challenged Atiku to prepare for the 2027 electoral contest rather than pursue what he described as a shortcut to power.
The response sets the stage for another potentially significant legal and political confrontation between the opposition and the governing party ahead of the 2027 election.
More opposition action over Tinubu’s records
The Federal High Court case is coming alongside another move by an ADC legal figure.
On Friday, ADC chieftain and lawyer Kalu Agu submitted a petition to the European Commission in Brussels concerning allegations surrounding Tinubu’s certificates, documents submitted to INEC and other issues that Atiku’s camp says raise questions about Nigeria’s constitutional order.
The developments indicate that disputes surrounding Tinubu’s academic and official records are once again moving beyond political rhetoric and into formal legal and institutional proceedings.
Rufai Oseni weighs in
The development has also generated reactions on social media.
Rufai Oseni, whose X account shared the development, commented on the significance of the lawsuit and the broader controversy surrounding the President’s documents.
The post has become part of the online discussion surrounding Atiku’s decision to take the matter back to court.
The original X post can be viewed here on X.
What Section 137(1)(j) could mean
Section 137(1)(j) is potentially significant because it expressly addresses the presentation of a forged certificate to INEC as a constitutional disqualification ground.
However, the practical question before the court is not simply whether an NYSC certificate carries a different name.
The court would have to determine the relevant facts, including the authenticity and provenance of the document, whether it was actually presented by Tinubu to INEC, the circumstances surrounding the name appearing on it, and whether the statutory and constitutional requirements for disqualification have been established.
Until the court determines those issues, the allegations remain claims by the plaintiffs and not established findings of fact.
The case could nevertheless become one of the most consequential pre-election legal battles of the 2027 presidential cycle.
This is particularly because it directly challenges the constitutional eligibility of the incumbent President.
