ADC To INEC: Don’t Turn PVC Delays in North-west into Voter Suppression
*Commission asks court to dismiss Atiku’s suit over Tinubu’s certificates
Chuks Okocha and Alex Enumah in Abuja
The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has called on the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to immediately publish a clear nationwide timetable for the production, distribution and collection of Permanent Voter Cards, warning that no Nigerian who has successfully registered should be disenfranchised by administrative delays.
The comes as INEC faulted a suit by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, accusing President Bola Tinubu of forging his academic certificates as a gross abuse of court process hence should be dismissed.
In a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi, the party said millions of Nigerians who participated in the voter registration exercise deserve certainty about when and where their PVCs will be available.
“You cannot register Nigerians to vote and then make them run from office to office searching for the card that enables them to exercise that right. Registration without access to a PVC is disenfranchisement by another route,” the ADC said.
The party called on INEC to immediately publish, state by state, the number of newly registered voters, PVCs produced, cards distributed, outstanding cards and designated collection centres.
According to the ADC, the commission must also intensify public information campaigns and decentralise collection wherever practicable to ensure that distance, bureaucracy and poor communication do not become barriers to participation.
“With the general election approaching, Nigerians should not be left wondering whether their cards will arrive in time. This is not a logistical footnote. It goes to the heart of the credibility of the election itself.”
The ADC said it would mobilise its structures nationwide to monitor PVC distribution and document complaints from registered voters unable to obtain their cards.
“We do not want an election-eve scramble, excuses or emergency promises. INEC has the opportunity to resolve this matter now, transparently and comprehensively.
“Every PVC that remains unnecessarily unavailable represents a citizen whose constitutional voice is at risk of being silenced. That must not be allowed to happen.”
2027: Atiku’s Suit over Tinubu’s Certificates Constitutes Gross Abuse, INEC Tells Court
INEC has described the suit by Atiku Abubakar, accusing Tinubu of forging his academic certificates as a gross abuse of court process hence should be dismissed.
INEC made the prayers in its counter affidavit it filed in response to Atiku’s suit seeking the disqualification of Tinubu from the forthcoming presidential election on account of alleged forgery.
The reply filed on behalf of INEC by its team of lawyers led by Dr. Alex Izinyon, SAN, noted that the suit did not disclose any reasonable cause and should be dismissed in its entirety.
The electoral umpire besides argued that the presidential candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) lacked the locus standi (legal right) to institute the action in the first place, adding that the issues raised in the suit were hypothetical and academic.
In an affidavit deposed in support of INEC’s response (counter-affidavit), the commission, which did not speak on the authenticity or otherwise of Tinubu’s educational credentials, the Commission explained that as the electoral umpire, it does not nominate candidates for political parties nor originate, manufacture, or procure personal certificates or credentials submitted by candidates or political parties sponsoring them.
The supporting affidavit deposed to by an Administrative Officer in the Litigation and Prosecution Department of INEC, Ayuba Mohammed, further explained that INEC in the discharge of its Constitutional and statutory responsibilities, receives documents submitted by candidates and deal with them in accordance with provisions of the 1999 Constitution, the Electoral Act 2026, and applicable Regulations and Guidelines.
The commission submitted that contrary to the impression conveyed in paragraphs 9-12 of Atiku’s supporting Affidavit, the mere receipt of a document submitted by or in respect of a candidate does not constitute a judicial or administrative determination by the Commission as to the authenticity of every statement or credential contained therein.
The deponent averred that, in response to paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Plaintiffs’ Affidavit, Section 137 of the Constitution speaks for itself and applies in accordance with its terms to a person who is proved, in accordance with law, to have presented a forged certificate to the 3rd Defendant.
“That the 3rd defendant denies any suggestion that a mere allegation that a forged certificate was presented, without proof of the fact of presentation and of the alleged forgery, automatically activates the constitutional disqualification prescribed by Section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution.
“That in respect of the 2027 Presidential Election, the 2nd Defendant submitted the name and particulars of the 1st Defendant to the 3rd Defendant as its nominated Presidential Candidate in accordance with the prescribed nomination process,” he said.
Justice Inyang Ekwo had earlier fixed September 28 for further proceedings on Atiku’s suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026.
While the ADC was joined as the 2nd plaintiff, President Tinubu, his political party the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), and the INEC were listed as 1st to 3rd defendants, respectively.
Specifically, Atiku, in a 25-paragraph affidavit he personally deposed to in support of the suit, had alleged that President Tinubu submitted a bogus National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) discharge certificate to INEC in aid of his qualification for the presidential seat.
Further alleging that Tinubu gave false information about himself in the Form CF0001 he tendered before INEC, the plaintiffs drew the court’s attention to the fact that the NYSC certificate he submitted to the electoral body bears the name “Tinubu Bola Adekunle.”
“I know that the NYSC certificate is clearly not one obtained by the 1st defendant, as it belongs to one Adekunle.
“The said NYSC certificate, bearing the name Tinubu Bola Adekunle, is herein attached and marked as Exhibit P2.
“I know that the said NYSC certificate is still in existence and in the custody of the 3rd defendant (INEC), and that it is a forgery, as the 1st defendant’s name is not Adekunle, and yet he submitted it to the 3rd defendant to be acted upon as genuine,” Atiku averred.
He told the court that Tinubu had been parading the forged certificate since 1999, when he contested the Lagos State governorship election.
Atiku therefore urged the court, among others, to determine: “Whether, in view of the limitations in section 138(1)(a) & (b) of the Electoral Act, 2026, and section 285(14)(c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended), the Plaintiffs will not be allowed to enforce the binding provision of section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended), which applies, mutatis mutandis, to all candidates aspiring to the office of President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”
As well as: “Whether the 1st and 2nd Defendants should be disqualified for presenting a forged NYSC certificate to the 3rd Defendant for the 2023 and 2027 Presidential Elections, in breach of section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended).”
Upon a positive determination of the legal questions, the plaintiffs sought a “declaration that the 1st Defendant presented a forged certificate to the 3rd Defendant when he contested for Governor of Lagos State in 1999, and thereby breached the provision of section 137(1)(j) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (As Amended).”
Likewise: “An order disqualifying the 1st and 2nd Defendants from participating in the 2027 Presidential Election, for presenting a forged certificate to the 3rd Defendant when the 1st Defendant contested for Governor of Lagos State in 1999.”
