The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed November 20, 2026, to rule on an application by former Vice President and African Democratic Congress (ADC) presidential candidate, Atiku Abubakar, seeking to amend his suit challenging President Bola Tinubu’s eligibility to participate in the 2027 presidential election.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
Justice Inyang Ekwo fixed the date on Tuesday after hearing arguments from lawyers representing Atiku and the ADC, as well as President Tinubu, the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, lists President Tinubu, the APC and INEC as defendants.
At the hearing, Atiku’s counsel, Joseph Silas, adopted his written address and urged the court to grant the application for amendment, arguing that the proposed changes were necessary to correct errors in the originating processes and place additional material before the court.
The plaintiffs filed the application on September 10, seeking leave to amend their originating summons and an order deeming the proposed amended processes properly filed.
According to them, errors in the original suit included reference to an INEC form as Form CF001 instead of Form EC9A. They also sought to introduce further particulars of the alleged fraud, attach a written deposition by Atiku and include clearer copies of documents said to have been unavailable when the suit was initially filed.
President Tinubu, the APC and INEC opposed the application.
Wole Olanipekun, SAN, who appeared for President Tinubu; Akin Olujinmi, SAN, for the APC; and Alex Izinyon, SAN, for INEC, urged the court to reject the request, arguing that the proposed amendment went beyond correcting typographical or descriptive errors and would substantially alter the plaintiffs’ case.
In a counter-affidavit, President Tinubu argued that the proposed amendment sought to change not only references to documents but also questions for determination and reliefs contained in the originating summons.
He further contended that Atiku and the ADC were attempting to introduce an entirely new relief and additional documents after the defendants had already responded to the original case.
“I also observed that the plaintiffs seek to introduce new documents through the affidavit by substituting FORM CF001 for FORM EC9, while seeking to introduce entirely new paragraphs in the supporting affidavit to the originating summons,” the President stated in the counter-affidavit.
According to him, the proposed changes would effectively alter the nature of the action.
President Tinubu also argued that the substantive suit was statute-barred, contending that the cause of action arose on July 11, when his name was submitted to INEC, while the suit was filed on August 14.
He maintained that Section 285(9) of the Constitution prescribes a 14-day period for the institution of pre-election matters and argued that the plaintiffs could not use an amendment to cure an alleged jurisdictional defect after the expiration of the constitutional period.
He further submitted that the attempt to introduce particulars of fraud amounted to an acknowledgment that such particulars were absent from the original processes.
The APC raised similar objections, while INEC argued that the proposed amendment was designed to substitute or introduce a new cause of action.
INEC contended that the plaintiffs were seeking to introduce a written deposition that was not filed within the constitutionally prescribed period, reformulate their reliefs and correct the alleged confusion between Forms CF001 and EC9.
The commission maintained that granting the application could amount to permitting the plaintiffs to cure an alleged jurisdictional defect after the 14-day period prescribed for filing pre-election suits.
In the substantive action, Atiku and the ADC are seeking, among other reliefs, an order disqualifying President Tinubu and the APC from participating in the 2027 presidential election.
Their case includes allegations concerning the National Youth Service Corps discharge certificate submitted by the President to INEC.
Atiku alleged in his supporting affidavit that the certificate bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle,” which he contends differs from the President’s name, Bola Ahmed Tinubu. He further alleged that the same certificate was submitted in connection with the 2027 presidential election and questioned its authenticity.
The allegations remain subject to determination by the court.
Justice Ekwo, after hearing submissions from all parties, adjourned the matter until November 20 for ruling on whether Atiku and the ADC will be permitted to amend their originating processes.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
