The Federal High Court in Abuja has granted an application by former Vice President and African Democratic Congress, ADC, presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, to serve court documents on President Bola Tinubu through the All Progressives Congress, APC.
Justice Inyang Edem Ekwo granted the request on Wednesday while ruling on an ex parte application filed by Atiku in a suit seeking to disqualify Tinubu from contesting the January 16, 2027 presidential election.
Atiku and the ADC are the plaintiffs in the suit, while Tinubu, the APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, are listed as defendants.
Atiku’s lawyer, Omotayo Ojo, who appeared for Silas Onu, told the court that the plaintiffs would effect service within seven days.
Justice Ekwo subsequently ordered that the court documents be served within seven days and adjourned the case until September 28 for mention.
Atiku’s legal team had on September 1 informed the court that the originating documents had not been personally served on Tinubu.
The lawyer therefore sought an order permitting service through substituted means, leading to the latest ruling.
Tinubu, the APC and INEC have already responded to the suit through counter affidavits and preliminary objections, challenging its competence and asking the court to dismiss it.
In a joint counter affidavit filed on September 9, Tinubu and the APC argued that the plaintiffs lacked the legal standing to institute the case and described the suit as incompetent.
The defendants also denied allegations that Tinubu submitted a forged certificate to INEC for the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
They maintained that no Form CF001 was submitted to INEC for either election as alleged by Atiku and the ADC.
Tinubu and the APC further stated that the National Youth Service Corps, NYSC, had never denied issuing a discharge certificate to the President after his service year.
In a written address filed alongside their objection, Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, argued that an allegation of forgery, being a criminal allegation, must be established beyond reasonable doubt.
Olujinmi also argued that evidence from the institution alleged to have issued a disputed certificate would be necessary to establish that the document was forged.
He maintained that the plaintiffs had not produced any evidence from the NYSC disclaiming the issuance of Tinubu’s discharge certificate.
The lawyer described the suit as hypothetical and academic, while also arguing that it was incompetent as a pre election matter.
INEC, in its own preliminary objection filed on September 7 through its lawyer, Dr Alex Izinyon, SAN, challenged the suit on grounds including statute bar, lack of legal standing, absence of a reasonable cause of action and alleged abuse of court process.
The electoral commission also argued that the plaintiffs failed to comply with the mandatory written deposition requirement under Paragraph 7(1) of the Federal High Court Pre Election Practice Directions, Amendment 2026.
INEC further challenged the propriety of two of the reliefs sought by Atiku and the ADC in their originating summons.
The case has been adjourned until September 28 for further proceedings.
