ABUJA, NIGERIA — The Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Amupitan, has approached the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking to set aside a subpoena compelling him to produce President Bola Tinubu’s electoral records from the 1999 Lagos State governorship election and the 2023 presidential election.
The application introduces a fresh legal dispute into the ongoing criminal trial of human rights activist and publisher, Omoyele Sowore, who is facing prosecution over social media publications in which he described President Tinubu as a criminal.
Amupitan, through his lawyer, Dr Alex Izinyon, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, filed a motion on notice dated November 10, 2026, asking the court to nullify the subpoena issued by Justice Mohammed Garba Umar on October 26.
The subpoena, titled Subpoena Duces Tecum, directed the INEC chairman to appear before the court and produce documents relating to Tinubu’s electoral submissions during the two elections.
Specifically, Sowore’s defence team requested Tinubu’s Form CF001 submitted during his 1999 Lagos State governorship candidacy, including an affidavit concerning lost certificates. The defence also requested the corresponding nomination document submitted for the 2023 presidential election.
The documents are being sought as part of the evidence the activist’s legal team intends to present in challenging the criminal allegations against him.
However, Amupitan has challenged the validity of the court order, arguing that it is defective, contradictory and unenforceable.
One of the major grounds in his application is that the subpoena was not personally served on him, as required by law. INEC’s legal team maintained that the document was instead delivered to the commission’s Litigation and Prosecution Department at its headquarters in Abuja on November 6.
The application further argues that the documents were incorrectly described and that the commission does not have records identified in the subpoena as INEC Form CF001 for the 1999 Lagos governorship election and the 2023 presidential election.
According to the chairman’s legal representatives, the specific forms described in the court order are unknown to the commission and are not in his custody in the stated format.
INEC also questioned the relevance of the requested documents to the criminal proceedings, with its lawyers arguing that the subpoena was brought in bad faith and could embarrass the electoral body.
The commission’s position, however, remains an argument presented in a pending court application. It does not, by itself, establish that all historical electoral records relating to Tinubu are unavailable or that the court has accepted INEC’s objections.
The subpoena followed an application by Sowore’s defence team, led by Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, seeking to compel individuals considered relevant to the defence to testify and produce documents.
Apart from the INEC chairman, the court approved a subpoena against Joe Igbokwe, a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress, as a proposed defence witness.
However, Justice Umar earlier set aside a subpoena directed at Akinlolu Kehinde, the lead prosecuting counsel for the Department of State Services, after considering objections to compelling the lawyer to testify.
Sowore is being prosecuted in a case marked FHC/CR/484/2025, between the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the activist. The proceedings have attracted public attention because they involve the boundaries of political expression, criticism of public officials and the use of official electoral documents in criminal defence proceedings.
The latest application by the INEC chairman places the question of access to the requested records before the court. The judge will have to consider the arguments concerning service, the description and custody of the documents, and the relevance of the requested evidence before deciding whether the subpoena should stand.
As of November 11, 2026, the Federal High Court had not been reported to have ruled on Amupitan’s application to set aside the subpoena. The outcome will determine whether the INEC chairman can still be compelled to appear and produce the records sought by Sowore’s defence.
