The academic and service records of Peter Obi, presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress, have become the subject of three separate Federal High Court actions in Abuja, drawing a firm defence from his party and reopening a broader argument about how far documentary scrutiny of candidates should reach before the 2027 election.
The suits were filed by Abayomi Arabambi, a chieftain of the Labour Party and former national publicity secretary of the Lamidi Apapa faction of that party. Two were lodged on 1 September 2026, against the West African Examinations Council, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2064/2026, and the National Youth Service Corps, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2063/2026. A third, against the University of Nigeria, Nsukka, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2144/2026, followed on 9 September. Court filings show the cases are before Justice Obiora Egwuatu, with no hearing date fixed at the time of filing.
Arabambi, through his counsel Anderson Asemota, is seeking orders of mandamus to compel the three institutions to release official records relating to certificates he says were issued to Obi. From WAEC he wants a certified true copy of certificate number SC042560, stated to have been issued to Obi Gregory Onwubuase in June 1978. From UNN he is seeking access to the certificate register, academic and graduation records, and Senate or degree award records connected to certificate number D000198. From the NYSC he wants records tied to discharge certificate number 203495, said to have been issued to Obi, Gregory Peter-Onwubuase, on 1 May 1986, and an explanation of how the name Peter-Onwubuase appears in those records.
The plaintiff has been careful to define the limits of his claim. According to the filings, he is not asking the court to determine whether the certificates Obi attached to the Form EC9 submitted to the Independent National Electoral Commission for the 2027 election are genuine or forged. He states that he is seeking access only to existing official records from which the status and particulars of the certificates may be established, and that he is not asking any institution to create documents that do not exist. He grounds the actions in the Freedom of Information Act 2011, alleging that the institutions either refused or failed to respond to written requests. Court documents indicate WAEC declined his request in a letter dated 11 August 2026, citing Sections 14(1)(a) and 14(2)(a) and (b) of that Act, provisions dealing with personal information. Arabambi says UNN and the NYSC neither granted his requests nor gave reasons.
The NDC has dismissed the actions as lacking merit. The party’s National Publicity Secretary, Osa Director, said Obi had a verifiable academic pedigree and challenged Arabambi to produce evidence to the contrary, noting the plaintiff’s own statement that he was not questioning the genuineness of the certificate. Director said it was Arabambi’s constitutional right to approach the court, but argued that the demand was frivolous and that the institutions had treated it as such. He also suggested the attention was misplaced, urging that public debate concentrate instead on the economy and insecurity.
The distinction Arabambi draws, between seeking records and alleging forgery, matters because of where the law now stands. The 1999 Constitution, in Section 137(1)(j), disqualifies from the presidency any person proved to have presented a forged certificate to INEC. That threshold requires proof of both presentation and forgery, a point INEC itself made this week in a separate but related matter, arguing that a mere allegation does not automatically trigger disqualification. The reach of pre-election challenges has also narrowed. The Electoral Act 2026, signed by President Bola Tinubu, limits election petitions to two grounds, that an election was invalid through corrupt practices or non-compliance, or that a winner did not secure a lawful majority. Certificate forgery, age falsification and false declarations were removed as standalone petition grounds. Obi himself criticised that amendment in March 2026, describing it as a contradiction of the constitution, which suggests the current suits proceed under freedom of information rather than the electoral framework he faulted.
The context is a field crowded with credential litigation. Obi’s route to the NDC ticket was itself unusual. He contested the 2023 election on the Labour Party platform, finishing third with 6,101,533 votes behind Tinubu and Atiku Abubakar. He and several allies moved to the African Democratic Congress in the opposition realignment of 2025, then left for the NDC, where he was unveiled as presidential candidate on 30 May 2026, setting up a three way contest with Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress and Atiku of the ADC.
Certificate questions are not confined to Obi. Atiku and the ADC have a pending suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1888/2026, asking the Federal High Court to determine whether Tinubu is qualified to contest, on grounds relating to the name on an NYSC certificate submitted to INEC. That matter was adjourned to 28 September 2026 over difficulties serving the President. In each of these cases, the underlying claims remain untested in evidence.
Three freedom of information suits have been filed against public institutions over Obi’s records. The institutions have so far declined or not responded to the requests. The plaintiff says he is not alleging forgery, and the NDC says its candidate has nothing to hide. What remains open is whether the court will order disclosure under the 2011 Act, and whether the institutions will succeed in resisting on the confidentiality grounds WAEC has already cited. Those questions, rather than any finding on the certificates themselves, are what the next stage of proceedings will decide.