Tinubu INEC Documents Row: President Dragged To Court And EU Over Forgery Claims
President Bola Tinubu was on Friday, August 14, 2026, hit with two separate legal actions from figures within the African Democratic Congress (ADC), one before the Federal High Court in Abuja and another before the European Commission in Brussels, both centred on allegations of forged documents submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) ahead of the 2027 general election.
Former Vice President and ADC presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, filed the domestic suit, asking the Federal High Court in Abuja to disqualify Tinubu from contesting the 2027 presidential election over an alleged forged National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) certificate. Atiku personally appeared at the court registry to depose to an affidavit supporting the suit, which was filed against Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and INEC. The suit invokes Sections 137(1)(j), 139(1)(a)(i) and 285(14)(c) of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, alongside relevant provisions of the Electoral Act 2026. At the heart of the case is Section 137(1)(j), which stipulates that a person is not qualified for election as president if he has presented a forged certificate to INEC.
According to Atiku’s affidavit, the NYSC discharge certificate allegedly submitted to INEC bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle” rather than the President’s official name, “Bola Ahmed Tinubu.” The plaintiffs further alleged that the document was not obtained by Tinubu himself. Atiku is also seeking a court order compelling INEC to produce Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted for both the 2023 and 2027 presidential elections, stating that his earlier requests to INEC for Certified True Copies of the relevant documents had gone unanswered before he decided to approach the court.
Explaining his decision to appear in person, Atiku said the matter went to the heart of the Constitution and the integrity of the presidency. “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,” he said. He added that the questions should be resolved through the judiciary rather than political or social media exchanges, stating that the presidency does not confer immunity from constitutional scrutiny.
On the same day, a separate petition was submitted to the European Commission in Brussels by ADC chieftain and lawyer, Kalu Kalu, alleging that Tinubu had subverted Nigeria’s constitutional order by presenting forged academic credentials to INEC ahead of the 2027 election, and by failing to disclose the primary and secondary schools he attended, in alleged breach of Section 137 of the Constitution. Kalu said the petition was intended to draw the EU’s attention to what he described as the erosion of constitutional rule in Nigeria and to seek the bloc’s intervention in restoring democratic order.
The twin actions build on an earlier petition filed on June 19, 2026, by the Centre for Reform and Public Advocacy, which had asked INEC to reopen investigations into Tinubu’s academic and NYSC records, questions that trace back to academic records released by Chicago State University following a U.S. court order connected to a separate case brought by Atiku. As of the time of filing, neither the Presidency, the APC, nor INEC had issued a formal response to the fresh allegations, and the claims contained in both the court suit and the EU petition remain unproven allegations yet to be tested through due legal process.
About the Author
