2027: INEC reportedly asks court to dismiss Atiku’s suit over Tinubu’s certificates
By KEMI KASUMU
It further argued that the mere receipt of a document submitted by or in respect of a candidate does not amount to a judicial or administrative determination by the commission that every statement or credential contained in the document is authentic.
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has reportedly asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a suit filed by former Vice President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, challenging President Bola Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged certificate.
INEC, in a counter-affidavit filed through a legal team led by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr Alex Izinyon, described the suit as a gross abuse of judicial process.
The electoral body argued that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action and should, therefore, be dismissed in its entirety.
It also contended that Atiku lacked the locus standi, or legal right, to institute the action, describing the issues raised as hypothetical and academic.
The counter-affidavit was supported by an affidavit deposed to by Ayuba Mohammed, an Administrative Officer in INEC’s Litigation and Prosecution Department.
Although INEC did not make any determination on the authenticity or otherwise of Tinubu’s educational credentials, the commission told the court that it neither nominates candidates for political parties nor originates, manufactures or procures personal certificates and credentials submitted by candidates or the political parties sponsoring them.
INEC said that, in the discharge of its constitutional and statutory responsibilities, it merely receives documents submitted by candidates and treats them in accordance with the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the Electoral Act 2026, and applicable regulations and guidelines.
It further argued that the mere receipt of a document submitted by or in respect of a candidate does not amount to a judicial or administrative determination by the commission that every statement or credential contained in the document is authentic.
The commission also maintained that the Constitution already provides the qualifications and disqualifications applicable to candidates seeking elective offices.
INEC’s deponent stated: “That in answer to paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Plaintiffs’ Affidavit, section 137 of the Constitution speaks for itself and applies in accordance with its terms to a person who is proved, in accordance with law, to have presented a forged certificate to the 3rd Defendant.
“That the 3rd Defendant denies any suggestion that a mere allegation that a forged certificate was presented, without proof of the fact of presentation and of the alleged forgery, automatically activates the constitutional disqualification prescribed by section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.”
The commission added that, for the 2027 presidential election, the APC submitted Tinubu’s name and particulars to INEC as its presidential candidate in accordance with the prescribed nomination process.
Justice Inyang Ekwo had earlier fixed September 28 for further proceedings in the suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026.
The ADC was joined as the second plaintiff, while Tinubu, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and INEC were listed as the first to third defendants respectively.
Atiku’s allegation
Atiku, in a 25-paragraph affidavit he personally deposed to in support of the suit, alleged that Tinubu submitted a forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate to INEC to support his qualification to contest the presidency.
He alleged that Tinubu supplied false information about himself in Form CF0001 submitted to INEC, drawing the court’s attention to an NYSC certificate which he said bore the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle.”
Atiku averred: “I know that the NYSC certificate is clearly not one obtained by the 1st defendant, as it belongs to one Adekunle.”
He identified the document as Exhibit P2 and alleged that it remained in INEC’s custody.
“I know that the said NYSC certificate is still in existence and in the custody of the 3rd defendant (INEC), and that it is a forgery, as the 1st defendant’s name is not Adekunle, and yet he submitted it to the 3rd defendant to be acted upon as genuine,” Atiku averred.
He further alleged that Tinubu had been parading the certificate since 1999, when he contested the Lagos State governorship election.
Atiku consequently asked the court to determine, among other issues, whether, in view of sections 138(1)(a) and (b) of the Electoral Act 2026 and section 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, the plaintiffs could enforce section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution, which provides for disqualification where a candidate is proved to have presented a forged certificate.
He also asked the court to determine whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from participating in the 2027 presidential election for allegedly presenting a forged NYSC certificate to INEC in connection with the 2023 and 2027 elections.
Upon a favourable determination, Atiku and the ADC are seeking a declaration that Tinubu presented a forged certificate to INEC when he contested the Lagos State governorship election in 1999, thereby breaching section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.
They are also seeking an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election over the alleged presentation of the certificate.
INEC, however, has urged the court to reject the suit, maintaining that an allegation of forgery, without proof of both the presentation and the alleged forgery, cannot by itself trigger the constitutional disqualification provision.
