President Bola Tinubu continues to be haunted by his past misdeeds as former Vice President and presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, drags him to court over certificate forgery, while in the United States of America (USA) Tinubu is fighting aggressively to restrict authorities from making public documented evidences relating to his alleged drug trafficking scandal
By Our Correspondent
The former Vice President and the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has dragged President Bola Tinubu before the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking his disqualification from the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged certificate of the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC).
Tinubu is not only facing the Atiku charges in the court, he is equally facing allegations from a lawyer and chieftain of the ADC, Kalu Agu, who has submitted a petition against him to the European Commission (EU) in Brussels, Belgium, for allegedly submitting a forged certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The two actions came on Friday, August 14, 2026, with Atiku personally appearing at the Federal High Court registry in Abuja to depose to an affidavit supporting the suit filed against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and INEC.
Atiku’s suit invoked sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i) and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, as well as relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026. At the centre of the case is Section 137(1)(j), which provides that a person shall not be qualified for election as President if he has presented a forged certificate to INEC.
Hence, Atiku and the ADC have asked the court to determine whether Tinubu should be disqualified from the 2027 presidential election over the allegation that he submitted a forged NYSC certificate in connection with his presidential candidacy. According to Atiku’s affidavit, the NYSC discharge certificate allegedly submitted to INEC bears the name, “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” rather than the President’s name, “Bola Ahmed Tinubu.”
The plaintiffs further alleged that the certificate was not obtained by Tinubu and that the same document was submitted in connection with the 2027 presidential election.
The Atiku’s suit also wants the court to compelled INEC to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted in connection with the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections.
The ADC presidential candidate said he had previously sought Certified True Copies (CTCs) of the relevant documents from INEC but had not received them before commencing the action.
Explaining his decision to personally appear at the court registry, Atiku said the case was too important to be handled casually.
He said, “I came here personally because the issues before the court go to the heart of our Constitution and the integrity of the office of President. “I have therefore put my name, my signature and my oath behind the facts we are presenting to the court. Now it is President Tinubu’s turn to answer them”.
Atiku said the case was not intended to be determined through political arguments or social media exchanges but through evidence presented before the judiciary. According to him, “We are not asking Nigerians to decide this matter on social media, and we are not asking INEC to become a court.
“We are asking the institution holding the records to produce them and the judiciary to examine the evidence and pronounce on it,” the statement read in part. The ADC presidential candidate also questioned whether the names appearing on the disputed certificate could legitimately be attributed to Tinubu.
Among the reliefs sought is an order disqualifying Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election if the allegations against them are established.
Atiku argued that the issue of certificate authenticity should be subject to the same standard applicable to ordinary Nigerians, stressing that, “The presidency is not an immunity certificate against constitutional scrutiny,” he said.
Atiku also called on INEC to demonstrate its neutrality by producing the relevant electoral records.
Counsel to the plaintiffs, Edwin Inegedu, SAN, and Joseph Onu Silas, expressed confidence in the case. But, reacting, the APC described the suit as an exercise in futility, asking Atiku to instead brace up for the real contest.
In the same vein, Agu submitted his petition to the European Commission, asking the EU to intervene over what he described as the alleged subversion of constitutional order in Nigeria.
Agu was captured in a video shared on X on the same Friday by Paul Ibe, Atiku’s media aide, while submitting the petition.
He alleged that Tinubu presented false academic credentials to INEC as part of the constitutional requirements for the 2027 election. According to Agu, Tinubu also allegedly failed to disclose the primary and secondary schools he attended in documents submitted to INEC. He argued that the alleged submission of forged certificates contravened Section 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution.
“This is in flagrant violation of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, particularly Section 137(1)(j), which says that if you have presented a forged certificate to INEC, you will not be qualified to run for election. He has submitted forged certificates to INEC, making him unqualified to run in the 2027 general election,” he said.
However, the Special Adviser to the President on Policy Communications, Daniel Bwala, dismissed the EU petition, describing it as a distraction by the opposition.
“The opposition is on a wild goose chase in Europe. They would do everything possible to distract and avoid answering the very one question: What would you do differently from this government?” Bwala wrote in a post on X. Agu has also raised the alarm over the transfer of a suit filed by the Centre for Reform and Public Advocacy (CFRPA) challenging the academic credentials of President Bola Tinubu.
The CFRPA filed the suit No. FHC/KN/CS/312/2026 on June 26, 2026, at the Federal High Court in Kano, raising constitutional questions under Sections 131 and 137(1)(j) of the 1999 Constitution.
However, the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court ordered the transfer of the case from Kano to Abuja following an application by Tinubu’s lawyers.
Agu rejected the transfer, alleging bias and forum shopping. He argued that the speed and manner of the transfer created a reasonable apprehension of preferential treatment. He also noted that Kano is where many of the group’s witnesses reside, and moving the case to Abuja imposed hardship and costs designed to frustrate the suit. The lawyer demanded that the Chief Judge should reverse the transfer order and allow the case to proceed in Kano.
He said if President Tinubu has nothing to hide regarding the allegations of forgery of academic credentials, why is he afraid of going to the North to stand trial and defend himself in Kano?
Casting doubt in the juduciary, activist lawyer Maduabuchi Idam has dismissed former Vice President Atiku Abubakar’s legal challenge against President Tinubu, describing it as “dead on arrival.”
Idam argued that while the case may have merit, Nigeria’s judicial system lacked the courage to deliver impartial justice in such politically sensitive matters.
According to him, “The sentiment of most Tinubu supporters, regrettably, may well be the reality confronting the suit—not because it lacks merit, but because the system appears too weak to allow justice to prevail.
“The greatest danger to democracy is not merely bad laws; it is a system where citizens lose faith that the law will be applied impartially”.
Meanwhile, the United States District judge, Beryl Howell, had issued Donald Trump-appointed attorney, Jeanine Pirro, four additional days to release the drug-trafficking records of Nigeria’s President Tinubu.
According to Dr Von Batten-Montague-York, who disclosed the development in a post on X, Judge Howell noted that the case had been pending for more than three years.
Pirro had reportedly requested an additional 10 days to comply with the order concerning records held by the US Department of Justice (DOJ), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).
But Judge Howell granted only four additional days, set August 21, 2026 as the deadline for compliance.
Von Batten said the development was a renewed effort by Pirro and the Department of Justice to release the records, insisting that the documents should now be made public.
“We deeply appreciate US Attorney Pirro and the DOJ’s renewed motivation to release these documents, and we agree with Judge Howell. This case has been pending for three years. The time to release the Tinubu drug-trafficking files is now,” he wrote.
According to him, US’s strategic interests with Nigeria should not prevent the release of the records.
“As President Trump has indicated, our shared interests with Nigeria do not mean supporting an alleged drug trafficker,” he added.
However, as many Nigerians waited in excitement to see the controversial drug trafficking records made public, the US once again made it impossible. It was gathered that Tinubu had deployed every arsenal available to ensure that his alleged drug trafficking records are never made public. Many analysts concluded that it was an indictment on the US and its authorities.
