Abuja — The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday adjourned until October 13, 2026, the hearing of a motion by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and the African Democratic Congress (ADC) seeking leave to amend their suit challenging President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, came up for further mention before Justice Inyang Ekwo. Counsel for the plaintiffs, Joseph Silas, informed the court that all relevant processes had been served on the defendants — Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
He added that the plaintiffs have responded to the defendants’ filings. He also notified the court of the pending application to amend the originating summons.
After confirming that the parties had been served with the amendment application, Justice Ekwo adjourned the matter. “This case is hereby adjourned until the 13th of October 2026, for hearing of the motion to amend originating summons,” the judge ruled.
Atiku, the ADC’s presidential candidate, and the party instituted the suit in August 2026. They are asking the court to determine whether Tinubu and the APC should be disqualified from the 2027 presidential election. The action invokes Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i) and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), as well as provisions of the Electoral Act, 2026.
A central plank of the case is the allegation that Tinubu submitted to INEC a National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate bearing the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle,” which the plaintiffs say differs from the President’s official name, Bola Ahmed Tinubu. They contend that the document is forged and was presented in connection with both the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections, thereby engaging the constitutional provision that disqualifies a person who has presented a forged certificate to INEC.
In their motion on notice, filed pursuant to Paragraph 7(8) of the Federal High Court (Pre-election) Practice Directions, 2006, Atiku and the ADC sought an order granting leave to amend the originating summons and another deeming the already-filed amended process as properly filed and served. They explained that after filing the suit on August 14, 2026, they discovered errors, particularly in the description of the INEC form attached to their affidavit, which was referred to as Form CF001 instead of the current Form EC9A used for candidates’ personal particulars. They also said they needed to set out the particulars of the alleged fraud more expressly, include Atiku’s written deposition, and attach clearer copies of the exhibits.
Tinubu, the APC and INEC have opposed the amendment application. They argued that the proposed changes go beyond correcting typographical errors and amount to an attempt to introduce new facts, documents and reliefs into a suit to which they had already filed responses. Tinubu’s counsel, among other points, contended that the substantive suit is statute-barred.
The court had earlier, on September 16, granted the plaintiffs permission for substituted service of the processes on Tinubu through the APC after efforts at personal service proved difficult.
The matter returns on October 13 for the hearing of the motion to amend. The substantive issues in the eligibility challenge remain pending.
About the Author
