The Federal High Court in Abuja has directed the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, SAN, to appear as a defence witness and produce President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s electoral documents relating to his 1999 Lagos State governorship candidacy and 2023 presidential election.
The development forms part of the ongoing criminal trial of human rights activist and African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore, who is being prosecuted by the Department of State Services (DSS) over social media publications in which he described President Tinubu as a “criminal”.
The subpoena seeks two categories of electoral documents from INEC: Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted during his 1999 Lagos governorship campaign, including an affidavit concerning lost certificates, and the corresponding Form CF001 submitted for his 2023 presidential candidacy.
The latest development was reported on Monday, November 9, following proceedings before Justice Mohammed Garba Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja.
Court Approves Subpoenas for Amupitan, Joe Igbokwe
According to reports from the court proceedings, Sowore’s defence counsel, R.O. Adakole, informed the court of the defence team’s intention to subpoena Amupitan and a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Chief Joe Igbokwe, to testify in the case.
Justice Umar reportedly granted the application and directed that subpoenas be issued to both proposed witnesses.
The court subsequently adjourned the proceedings until November 11, 2026, for the appearance of the subpoenaed defence witnesses.
Speaking to journalists after Monday’s proceedings, Sowore confirmed that the INEC chairman was among those expected to appear before the court.
He indicated that the defence had reasons for seeking Amupitan’s testimony but declined to disclose the specific questions or issues it intended to raise.
The subpoena is significant because it seeks to bring electoral records concerning Tinubu’s political history into proceedings arising from Sowore’s prosecution over his social media comments.
Documents Sought From INEC
The subpoena, titled Subpoena Duces Tecum, directs the INEC chairman to produce specified electoral records in his official capacity as head of the commission.
The documents requested include:
▪︎1999 Lagos governorship Form CF001: The electoral filing submitted by Tinubu when he contested the Lagos State governorship election.
▪︎Affidavit concerning lost certificates: A document reportedly included among Tinubu’s 1999 electoral filings, relating to certificates said to have been lost.
▪︎2023 presidential Form CF001: The candidate information form submitted by Tinubu to INEC for the 2023 presidential election.
The defence is seeking both documentary evidence and oral testimony from the electoral commission’s chairman.
Fresh Development After October 26 Subpoena
The latest development follows an earlier subpoena circulated by Sowore, which reportedly directed Amupitan to appear before the Federal High Court on October 26, 2026.
That document identified the proceedings as Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Omoyele Sowore, with Charge No. FHC/CR/484/2025, and directed the INEC chairman to attend Courtroom 5 before Justice Mohammed Garba Umar.
It specifically requested Tinubu’s 1999 governorship Form CF001, the accompanying affidavit concerning lost certificates, and his 2023 presidential Form CF001.
The October 26 document, however, did not establish whether Amupitan appeared or whether the requested records were produced on that date.
The November 9 proceedings provide a further development, with reports indicating that the court approved the defence’s request to subpoena the INEC chairman and Joe Igbokwe as witnesses.
The case is now scheduled to resume on November 11.
Sowore’s Trial
The criminal proceedings originated from social media publications made by Sowore on August 25 and 26, 2025, following President Tinubu’s remarks about corruption during a visit to Brazil.
In the publications, Sowore described the President as a “criminal” and criticised his comments about corruption in Nigeria.
The DSS subsequently demanded that Sowore remove the publications, retract the statements and issue a public apology.
Following his refusal, the agency instituted criminal proceedings at the Federal High Court in Abuja.
The initial five-count charge, filed in September 2025, included allegations of cyberstalking and criminal defamation under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024.
The case was initially brought against Sowore alongside X Corporation, formerly Twitter, and Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook.
However, in January 2026, the prosecution amended the charge, reducing the counts from five to two and removing X and Meta as defendants.
Sowore subsequently pleaded not guilty to the amended charges.
The case is marked FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025.
Court Rejects Sowore’s Attempt to Subpoena DSS Lawyer
Monday’s proceedings also featured a setback for Sowore’s defence.
Justice Umar set aside an earlier subpoena issued against DSS counsel, Akinlolu Kehinde, SAN, after ruling that lawyers are generally protected by professional confidentiality obligations concerning communications arising from their legal representation of clients.
The court reportedly held that legal practitioners could only be compelled to testify in limited circumstances, particularly where the evidence concerns an uncontested matter or would not prejudice the client’s interests.
The ruling followed an application by the DSS challenging the subpoena.
The court’s rejection of the request to compel Kehinde’s appearance did not prevent the defence from seeking other witnesses.
Indeed, the defence subsequently requested subpoenas for Amupitan and Igbokwe, an application which the judge reportedly granted.
The court had previously rejected a similar attempt to subpoena DSS Director-General Oluwatosin Ajayi, allowing the agency to delegate another senior official to testify on its behalf.
Earlier Court Rulings in the Sowore Case
The latest development comes against the background of several unsuccessful applications by Sowore’s defence during the proceedings.
On May 8, 2026, Justice Umar reportedly dismissed Sowore’s no-case submission, ruling that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case requiring the defendant to enter his defence.
The court had also dismissed applications challenging the legality of the prosecution and seeking to terminate the proceedings on fundamental rights grounds.
In June 2026, the court revoked Sowore’s bail following his failure to appear for a scheduled hearing and ordered his remand at the Kuje Correctional Centre. Subsequent proceedings addressed his detention and bail arrangements.
These developments form part of the procedural history of the case and do not amount to a final determination of Sowore’s guilt.
He continues to face the allegations and maintains his plea of not guilty.