The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), through its Chairman, Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, SAN, has approached the Federal High Court in Abuja seeking to set aside a subpoena compelling the electoral body to produce documents relating to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s 1999 Lagos State governorship election and 2023 presidential election.
Court documents obtained on November 10, 2026, showed that the INEC chairman, through his lawyers, filed a Motion on Notice dated November 10, 2026, asking the court to nullify the subpoena issued on October 26, 2026, in the ongoing criminal trial of human rights activist and African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate, Omoyele Sowore.
The subpoena was issued by Justice Mohammed Garba Umar of the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Charge No. FHC/CR/484/2025, involving the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Sowore.
Sowore is being prosecuted over statements in which he described President Tinubu as a criminal.
The subpoena specifically directed the INEC chairman to produce the commission’s Form CF001, including the affidavit relating to lost certificates submitted by Tinubu during his 1999 Lagos State governorship candidacy.
READ ALSO:
- US Court Rejects Bid to Obtain Evidence Against Tinubu in FOIA Case
- ‘Tinubu Govt Would Have Kept Obi in Detention Until After Election’ — Pat Utomi Claims
- Tinubu Told 2023 Campaign Loyalists Feel Abandoned by His Administration
It also demanded Tinubu’s INEC Form CF001, or its equivalent, relating to his 2023 presidential candidacy.
According to the court documents, the subpoena was served on INEC’s Litigation and Prosecution Department at the commission’s Abuja headquarters on November 6, 2026, at approximately 12:30 p.m.
However, rather than produce the requested documents, the INEC chairman has challenged the validity of the subpoena.
In the application filed through his counsel, Dr Alex A. Izinyon, SAN, Amupitan is asking the court to declare the subpoena void, unenforceable and contradictory.
The application argues that the subpoena was not personally served on Professor Amupitan, as required by law, and that the documents being demanded are either incorrectly described or do not exist in the form specified.
INEC’s lawyers further contend that the subpoena is irrelevant to the criminal proceedings against Sowore and was issued in bad faith.
