A suit instituted by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar seeking to prevent President Bola Ahmed Tinubu from contesting the 2027 presidential election has suffered a setback at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The case centres on an alleged discrepancy in the name contained on the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate submitted by Tinubu to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The case could not make substantive progress after the plaintiff’s lawyer told the court that he had been unable to personally serve the President with the originating summons.
At the mention of the suit, counsel to Atiku, Joseph Onu, informed the court that efforts to serve the defendant had not been successful. He indicated that he wanted the court process served directly on Tinubu or, where necessary, through substituted service.
The development led to a dispute over service of the court documents, as counsel representing Tinubu attempted to receive the originating summons on behalf of the President. Onu, however, declined to hand over the process, insisting that the defendant must be served personally or in accordance with an order for substituted service.
Justice Inyang Ekwo, who presided over the proceedings, subsequently adjourned the matter until September 28 for further mention.
Atiku had filed the suit to challenge Tinubu’s eligibility to seek another term in office, placing particular emphasis on the NYSC certificate the President reportedly submitted to INEC as part of the documents supporting his qualification for the 2023 presidential election.
The plaintiffs are questioning the difference between the name appearing on the disputed certificate and the name by which the President is officially known. They argued that while the certificate bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle”, the President’s official name is “Bola Ahmed Tinubu”.
They are asking the court to determine whether the alleged difference in the names has any constitutional implication for Tinubu’s eligibility to contest the 2027 presidential election.
The suit is coming as preparations for the 2027 election gather momentum, with Tinubu seeking re-election on the platform of the All Progressives Congress (APC), while Atiku is seeking the presidency under the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
The legal challenge is another point of confrontation between the two politicians, who were major contenders in the 2023 presidential election, which Tinubu won.
Recall that former presidential aide and television anchor Reuben Abati recently criticised Atiku’s camp over its complaint about Tinubu’s decision to embark on a three-week working vacation outside Nigeria.
Abati said the opposition was asking questions that had not been properly researched, arguing that the President was constitutionally permitted to travel without formally transferring power if his absence did not exceed the period stipulated by the Constitution.
“The Atiku group is also raising questions that are embarrassing and have not been properly researched,” Abati said.
He defended Tinubu’s decision to travel, saying, “As for a working vacation, state visit or whatever, he is entitled to it. So, wherever he wants to go, he can go.”
Abati, however, identified what he described as a more important issue concerning the President’s trip. He noted that Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima were both outside Nigeria around the same period, with Shettima reportedly in Angola while Tinubu travelled to Europe.
“I think where the problem is, which is where the Atiku camp should have put their focus, is that as of the time the president was travelling yesterday, I’m not sure that the Vice President of Nigeria was in the country,” he said.