ABUJA, Nigeria – The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday adjourned until October 13, 2026, to hear formal applications seeking leave to amend originating processes in a lawsuit instituted by the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress, Atiku Abubakar, challenging the constitutional eligibility of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to participate in the 2027 presidential election, judicial correspondents reported from the courtroom on Monday afternoon, September 28, 2026.
The pre-election suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, was listed for further mention before presiding judge Justice Inyang Ekwo, bringing together senior legal counsels representing the former vice president, President Tinubu, the ruling All Progressives Congress, and the Independent National Electoral Commission.
Okay News reports that Atiku and the ADC are asking the court to disqualify President Tinubu from seeking re-election in 2027, alleging that the National Youth Service Corps discharge certificate presented to the electoral body contains material discrepancies, specifically asserting that the credential bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” instead of the President’s official designation.
When the matter was called on Monday, counsel for the plaintiffs, Joseph Onu Silas, informed the court that originating processes had been duly served on all the defendants within statutory timelines and that the plaintiffs had formally received and responded to counter-affidavits filed by the defense.
Silas subsequently drew the court’s attention to a pending motion on notice filed by the plaintiffs seeking judicial permission to effect substantial amendments to their originating summons, explaining that the proposed adjustments seek to substitute Form CF001 with Form EC9, incorporate clearer documentary exhibits, and introduce additional particulars of alleged misrepresentation, including a sworn written deposition by Atiku Abubakar.
The proposed amendment met with opposition from the legal team representing President Tinubu, led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, alongside counsel for the APC, Oluwole Olawale Afolabi, SAN, and counsel for INEC, Chief Alex Iziyon, SAN, who confirmed that counter-affidavits opposing the plaintiffs’ amendment had been served.
Counsel for the defendants contended that the plaintiffs’ motion for amendment is fundamentally misconceived, arguing that granting leave to amend at this stage would introduce a fresh cause of action and alter the character of the litigation after the expiration of the strict 14-day statutory period prescribed under Section 285(9) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) for instituting pre-election actions.
The defense further maintained that the substantive suit is statute-barred, asserting that the court lacks jurisdiction to cure fatal initiating defects through post-filing amendments, while noting that establishing allegations of certificate discrepancy requires an official disclaimer from the issuing authority.
Chief Olanipekun also reminded the court of earlier procedural disputes surrounding service, noting that the defense had voluntarily collected court processes and filed comprehensive preliminary objections and counter-affidavits disputing the competence of the action.
Justice Ekwo intervened to direct the legal teams to focus on the procedural business before the court, confirming that all relevant applications and responses had been lodged in the court registry.
“This case is hereby adjourned until the 13th of October 2026, for hearing of the motion to amend originating summons,” Justice Ekwo ruled.
The scheduled October 13 session is expected to decide whether the plaintiffs will be permitted to restructure their pleadings or whether the preliminary objections raised by President Tinubu, the APC, and INEC challenging the court’s jurisdiction will proceed directly to determination.
