The African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, walked into the Registry of the Federal High Court in Abuja on Friday, August 14, 2026, to personally swear to an affidavit backing a lawsuit that seeks to bar President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) from participating in the 2027 presidential election.

The suit, filed by Atiku and the ADC against Tinubu, the APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), rests primarily on Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution, which bars anyone who submitted a forged certificate to INEC from standing for the presidency.

Atiku's Senior Special Assistant on Public Communication, Phrank Shaibu, disclosed this in a statement made available to Legit.ng.

Tinubu's certificate at centre of the case

Atiku's affidavit alleged that the NYSC discharge certificate Tinubu submitted to INEC bears the name "Tinubu Bola Adekunle," which differs from the President's name, Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

The plaintiffs contend the document is not one obtained by Tinubu, and that the same certificate was submitted in connection with both the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.

The originating summons asks the court to determine whether these facts, if established, should result in Tinubu's disqualification.

Atiku also served notice on INEC to produce Tinubu's Form CF001 filed for both elections, saying his office had applied for certified true copies before filing the suit but had received no response.

"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."

Constitutional supremacy also in dispute Beyond the certificate, the suit challenges provisions of the Electoral Act 2026 which, according to the plaintiffs' written address, limit who can question a candidate's qualification at the pre-election stage and remove qualification as a valid ground for challenging an election result.

Atiku's legal team argues that ordinary legislation cannot be used to shut out an express constitutional provision, and that the Constitution must prevail where there is a conflict.

Silas Onu said:

"Can an Act of the National Assembly be used as a shield against an express provision of the Constitution?" Atiku asked.

"Our position is that the Constitution remains supreme." Counsel for the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu SAN and Joseph Onu Silas, said the legal team had reviewed the arguments thoroughly and was ready to face the defendants once served.

"We are confident that justice will prevail. This case presents an important opportunity to further develop Nigeria's electoral jurisprudence."

The former vice president said his personal appearance was deliberate, calling it a signal that he holds himself to the same standard he demands of others.

"I have sworn to my case before the law. I am prepared to be held accountable for what I have placed before the court. President Tinubu should equally be prepared to answer the case against him before the law."

PDP chieftain speaks on Tinubu’s certificate saga

Recall that a Lagos-based PDP official published an open letter calling on party members to abandon Tinubu's certificate controversy ahead of 2027.

The chairman argued that the certificate strategy has failed in court repeatedly since 1999 and is costing the opposition valuable ground.

He outlined four steps he wants PDP members to take instead, covering ward organisation, policy messaging, and coalition building.