INEC asks court to set aside subpoena for Tinubu’s 1999, 2023 election records

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has asked the Federal High Court in Abuja to set aside a subpoena directing its chairman, Joash Amupitan, to produce President Bola Tinubu’s records from the 1999 Lagos State governorship election and the 2023 presidential election.

In a motion filed on Tuesday, the commission argued that the subpoena was defective, that Mr Amupitan was not personally served and that the documents requested were not in its custody in the form described.

The application came ahead of Mr Amupitan’s scheduled appearance in court on Wednesday as a subpoenaed defence witness in the criminal trial of human rights activist Omoyele Sowore.

The case, marked FHC/CR/484/2025, is before trial judge Mohammed Umar.

Mr Sowore is being prosecuted in the case by the State Security Service for calling Mr Tinubu a criminal in social .edia posts last year.

INEC, through its lawyer, Alex Izinyon, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), asked the court to set aside the subpoena issued on 26 October. The motion was received at the court registry at 3.45 p.m. on Tuesday.

The subpoena, titled Subpoena Duces Tecum, requires Mr Amupitan, a professor, to produce two sets of documents submitted by Mr Tinubu to the electoral commission.

They are the president’s Form CF001 for the 1999 Lagos governorship election, including an affidavit relating to lost certificates, and his corresponding nomination form for the 2023 presidential election.

The court also directed the INEC chairman to testify for the defence and remain in attendance until the case is determined.

According to The Guardian newspaper, a hearing notice was served on Mr Amupitan on Monday, 9 November, directing him to appear in court on Wednesday, 11 November.

INEC’s grounds for challenging the subpoena

In its application, the commission listed four grounds for asking the court to set aside the subpoena.

It described the document as “void ab initio, ungrantable, inconsistent and contradictory”.

INEC also argued that Mr Amupitan was not personally served with the subpoena, as required by law.

On the documents sought by the defence, the commission said there was no form known as INEC CF01 for either the 1999 Lagos governorship election or the 2023 presidential election.

It maintained that the forms, as described in the subpoena, were unknown to it and were not in the custody of its chairman.

The commission further accused Mr Sowore’s defence team of bringing the application in bad faith, describing it as irrelevant, speculative and intended to embarrass the electoral body.

In an affidavit supporting the motion, Mendie Akpan, a litigation secretary in Mr Izinyon’s law firm, explained how the subpoena was received at INEC’s headquarters.

Ms Akpan said the document was served on the commission’s Litigation and Prosecution Department at about 12.30 p.m. on 6 November.

She said the information was obtained during a telephone conference with Mr Izinyon at his Abuja office on 10 November, following information received from the INEC chairman.

According to the affidavit, Mr Amupitan was not personally served with the subpoena on 6 November or at any other time.

Ms Akpan also stated that the chairman was not a party to the criminal proceedings between the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Mr Sowore.

She added that Mr Amupitan was not the maker of the documents and could not give evidence about them.

Other defence witnesses

The subpoena followed an application by Mr Sowore’s defence team, led by Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, also a SAN, seeking to compel relevant individuals to appear in court and produce documents considered necessary for his defence.

Apart from Mr Amupitan, the court approved a subpoena against Joe Igbokwe, a chieftain of the All Progressives Congress, as a proposed defence witness.

However, Mr Umar set aside an earlier subpoena issued against the State Security Service (SSS) lead prosecuting lawyer, Akinlolu Kehinde, also a SAN, ruling that the lawyer should not be compelled to testify in the case.

The court adjourned the proceedings until 11 November for further hearing.

Sowore reacts

Mr Sowore disclosed INEC’s move in a Facebook post on Tuesday, accusing the commission of trying to avoid producing the president’s electoral records.

READ ALSO: Sowore dismisses police’s arrest of 11 suspects linked to his attack in Ekiti, alleges cover-up

“Instead of producing the documents, @inecnigeria has rushed to court, asking that the subpoena be set aside!” he wrote.

He questioned why the commission was challenging a court order for documents he said should be in its custody.

“Why is INEC fighting a court order demanding records that should be in its custody? What exactly is the electoral commission afraid of producing?” he asked.

The activist insisted that the records must be produced on Wednesday.

Mr Sowore is being prosecuted by the SSS over social media publications in which he described President Tinubu as a criminal. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.

INEC’s application seeks to prevent its chairman from being compelled to produce the documents and testify in the trial. The Federal High Court is yet to rule on the application.