Cyril Mbah, Abuja
The All Progressives Congress (APC) has written to the Deputy Chief Registrar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, over an order for substituted service made by Justice I.E. Ekwo in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026 between Atiku Abubakar & Anor Versus Bola Ahmed Tinubu & Ors.
In the letter dated 22nd September, 2026, and addressed to the Registrar, Court 6, the party said its attention was drawn to the order made on 16th September, 2026, for substituted service on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu through the APC in the media and that no letter has been sent to its National Secretariat.
The APC, in the letter signed by its National Secretary, Senator Surajudeen Ajibola Basiru, said it became aware of the order through media propaganda embarked upon by the plaintiffs immediately after the case was filed at the court, although no enrolled order had been served on the party.
The party said as a responsible and law-abiding political party, it respects all courts and their orders, but is also under duty to bring to the attention of the court when its processes are being abusively employed to harass the public or its members, particularly President Tinubu.
According to the letter, the plaintiffs instituted the action against President Tinubu, APC and INEC as 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants respectively in August 2026, and the 1st plaintiff addressed the press after filing the process, saying he personally deposed to the supporting affidavit.
It stated that while plaintiffs served the 2nd and 3rd defendants, they failed to serve the 1st defendant, but President Tinubu, upon learning of the suit through the press, briefed his legal team led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, CFR, SAN, to defend him.
The APC said on 1st September, 2026, when the matter was listed, counsel briefed by the President, Mr. Omosanya Popoola, SAN, appeared and informed the court of readiness to accept service on behalf of Tinubu, but counsel to the plaintiffs objected and the matter was adjourned to 28th September.
The party added that on further instruction of President Tinubu, his lead counsel formally wrote the court on 10th September, 2026, stating that the 1st defendant instructed him to collect the originating processes and obtain Certified True Copies.
Based on that, the letter said the 1st defendant’s counsel obtained and paid for Certified True Copies on 11th September, filed a Preliminary Objection on 14th September and a defence with comprehensive written address on 15th September, both served on plaintiffs’ counsel.
The APC said the application for substituted service moved on 16th September by plaintiffs’ counsel did not draw the court’s attention to the fact that the 1st defendant’s defence had already been filed and served.
It concluded that it does not have the consent or authority of President Tinubu to receive processes on his behalf as he has engaged counsel of his choice, a fact known to plaintiffs’ counsel, and that both APC and Tinubu have filed defences and are ready to prosecute the case.
For a better society
_______________________________
Follow us across our platforms:
Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/championnewsonline/
Facebook – https://web.facebook.com/championnewsonline
LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/company/champion-newspapers-limited/
https://x.com/championnewsng/
You can also like and comment on our YouTube videos.
https://youtu.be/QIBfD1tT80w?si=R4Qf3so2LxYu3GC2
