The All Progressives Congress (APC) has informed the Federal High Court in Abuja that an order granting substituted service of court processes on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu through the party was unnecessary, arguing that the President had already engaged counsel and filed processes in the matter.
In a letter dated September 22, 2026,plnd addressed to the Deputy Chief Registrar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, with attention to the Registrar of Court 6 presided over by Justice I.E. Ekwo, the APC raised concerns over the order for substituted service granted on September 16 in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026 between former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and another plaintiff against President Tinubu and others.
The letter, signed by the APC National Secretary, Senator Surajudeen Ajibola Basiru, stated that the party became aware of the order through media reports and had not been formally served with the enrolled order by the plaintiffs.
According to the APC, the plaintiffs filed the suit against President Tinubu, the APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) sometime in August 2026 and proceeded to serve the party and INEC but allegedly failed to serve the President.
The ruling party said that immediately after learning of the suit through media reports, President Tinubu briefed a legal team led by Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, to represent him in the matter.
The APC further stated that when the case came up on September 1, 2026, one of the President’s lawyers, Mr Omosanya Popoola, SAN, appeared in court and indicated readiness to accept service of the court processes on behalf of the President. However, the plaintiffs’ counsel reportedly objected to the request.
The party disclosed that on September 10, Chief Olanipekun formally notified the court that he had been instructed by President Tinubu to receive the originating processes and obtain certified true copies on his behalf.
According to the APC, the President’s legal team obtained the court documents on September 11, filed a preliminary objection on September 14, and subsequently filed a defence and written address on September 15.
It added that both the preliminary objection and defence were served on the plaintiffs’ counsel, who acknowledged receipt of the documents.
The APC argued that the court was not informed of these developments when the plaintiffs moved their ex parte application for substituted service on September 16.
The party also maintained that it had neither the authority nor the consent of President Tinubu to receive court processes on his behalf, noting that he had already retained counsel of his choice to handle the matter.
“It is for the foregoing reasons that the APC wishes to inform the Court that the ex parte application for substituted service filed by the Plaintiffs was unnecessary,” the letter stated.
The ruling party told the court that both it and President Tinubu had already filed their respective defences and were prepared to proceed with the case.
The suit, instituted by former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and another plaintiff, is pending before Justice Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
