2027: INEC Asks Court To Dismiss Atiku’s Suit Over Tinubu Certificates
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss the suit accusing President Bola Tinubu of submitting forged certificates in aid of his qualification to contest for presidency.
The electoral body, in a counter-affidavit it filed through its team of lawyers led by a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Dr. Alex Izinyon, maintained that the legal action which was instituted against Tinubu by a former Vice President and presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, constituted a gross abuse of the judicial process.
It argued that the suit failed to disclose any reasonable cause and therefore ought to be dismissed in its entirety.
According to INEC, Atiku was bereft of the locus standi (legal right) to institute the action, insisting issues raised in the suit were hypothetical and academic.
The counter-affidavit was supported with an affidavit that was deposed to by an Administrative Officer in the Litigation and Prosecution Department of INEC, Ayuba Mohammed.
Although INEC did not speak to the authenticity or otherwise of President Tinubu’s educational credentials, it told the court that that as the electoral umpire, it does not nominate candidates for political parties nor originate, manufacture, or procure personal certificates or credentials submitted by candidates or political parties sponsoring them.
It told the court that in the discharge of its Constitutional and statutory responsibilities, it receives documents submitted by candidates and deal with them in accordance with provisions of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, the Electoral Act 2026, and applicable Regulations and Guidelines.
INEC told the court that contrary to the impression conveyed in paragraphs 9-12 of Atiku’s supporting Affidavit, the mere receipt of a document submitted by or in respect of a candidate does not constitute a judicial or administrative determination by the Commission as to the authenticity of every statement or credential contained therein.
It added that Constitution already prescribed qualifications and disqualifications applicable to candidates for elective offices.
“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 3” 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.
“That in respect of the 2027 Presidential Election, the 2nd Defendant submitted the name and particulars of the 1st Defendant to the 3rd Defendant as its nominated Presidential Candidate in accordance with the prescribed nomination process,” INEC’s deponent averred.
Justice Inyang Ekwo had earlier fixed September 28 for further proceedings on Atiku’s suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026.
While the ADC was joined as the 2nd plaintiff, President Tinubu, his political party the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), and the INEC were listed as 1st to 3rd defendants, respectively.
Specifically, Atiku, in a 25-paragraph affidavit he personally deposed to in support of the suit, alleged that President Tinubu submitted a bogus National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate to INEC in aid of his qualification for the presidential seat.
Insisting that President Tinubu gave false information about himself in the Form CF0001 he tendered before INEC, the plaintiffs drew the court’s attention to the fact that the NYSC certificate he submitted to the electoral body bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle.”
“I know that the NYSC certificate is clearly not one obtained by the 1st defendant, as it belongs to one Adekunle.
“The said NYSC certificate, bearing the name Tinubu Bola Adekunle, is herein attached and marked as Exhibit P2.
“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 told the court that Tinubu had been parading the forged certificate since 1999, when he contested the Lagos State governorship election.
Atiku therefore urged the court, among others, to determine: “Whether, in view of the limitations in section 138(1)(a) & (b) of the Electoral Act, 2026, and section 285(14)(c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended), the Plaintiffs will not be allowed to enforce the binding provision of section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended), which applies, mutatis mutandis, to all candidates aspiring to the office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
As well as: “Whether the 1st and 2nd Defendants should be disqualified for presenting a forged NYSC certificate to the 3rd Defendant for the 2023 and 2027 Presidential Elections, in breach of section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended).”
Upon a positive determination of the legal questions, the plaintiffs sought a “declaration that the 1st Defendant presented a forged certificate to the 3rd Defendant when he contested for Governor of Lagos State in 1999, and thereby breached the provision of section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended).”
Likewise: “An order disqualifying the 1st and 2nd Defendants from participating in the 2027 Presidential Election, for presenting a forged certificate to the 3rd Defendant when the 1st Defendant contested for Governor of Lagos State in 1999.”
