President Bola Tinubu and the All Progressives Congress (APC) have urged the Federal High Court in Abuja to dismiss a suit seeking to disqualify them from the 2027 presidential election, while denying allegations that Tinubu submitted a forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The suit, filed by the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar and the ADC, challenges Tinubu’s eligibility based on the alleged submission of the disputed NYSC certificate.

The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, lists Tinubu, the APC and INEC as the first, second and third defendants respectively.

Atiku and the ADC are asking the court to disqualify Tinubu and the APC and order INEC to remove their names from the list of candidates and political parties for the 2027 presidential election.

Meanwhile, Justice Inyang Ekwo has granted Atiku permission to serve the court processes on Tinubu through the APC after the plaintiffs told the court that attempts to personally serve the President had been unsuccessful.

The order was granted on Wednesday following an ex parte application argued by Atiku’s counsel, Olanrewaju Omotayo-Ojo. The judge directed that the processes be served through the APC within seven days and adjourned the case until September 28 for further proceedings.

Omotayo-Ojo told the court that substituted service had become necessary because the originating summons and other processes had not been personally served on Tinubu.

The issue of service had previously stalled proceedings, with the plaintiffs insisting on personally serving the President or obtaining an order permitting substituted service.

In their joint counter-affidavit, Tinubu and the APC denied submitting any forged certificate to INEC in connection with either the 2023 or 2027 presidential election.

The document, deposed to by APC Director of Legal Services, Sanusi Samaila, also disputed the claim that Tinubu or the party submitted Form CF001 to INEC for either election.

The defendants maintained that the NYSC had never disowned the discharge certificate issued to Tinubu. They also argued that submitting the President’s personal particulars to INEC did not violate any constitutional provision.

In a written address filed on behalf of Tinubu and the APC, their counsel, Chief Akin Olujinmi, SAN, argued that the forgery allegation was criminal in nature and therefore had to be proved beyond reasonable doubt under Section 135(1) of the Evidence Act.

Olujinmi further argued that evidence from the institution alleged to have issued a forged document would be central to establishing such an allegation.

He contended that Atiku and the ADC had not produced any disclaimer from the NYSC denying that it issued the discharge certificate attributed to Tinubu.

The defence also argued that the plaintiffs failed to produce the original document from which the alleged forgery was made alongside the disputed certificate.

On that basis, Tinubu and the APC described the suit as hypothetical and lacking sufficient material facts.

They further argued that the action was incompetent as a pre-election matter and that Atiku and the ADC lacked the legal standing to challenge Tinubu’s emergence as the APC presidential candidate.

INEC has also challenged the competence of the suit.

In a preliminary objection filed through its counsel, Alex Izinyon, the electoral commission urged the court to dismiss the case, arguing that it was statute-barred and that the plaintiffs lacked the legal standing to institute it.

INEC also contended that the suit disclosed no reasonable cause of action and amounted to an abuse of court process.

The commission further challenged the plaintiffs’ compliance with the Federal High Court Pre-Election Practice Directions, including requirements relating to written depositions.

INEC opposed some of the reliefs sought by Atiku and the ADC and urged the court to strike out the suit.