Abuja, FCT — The Federal High Court in Abuja has issued a subpoena directing the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, SAN, to appear before it and produce electoral documents relating to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s governorship candidacy in 1999 and presidential candidacy in 2023.
The subpoena was shared by AAC presidential candidate, Mr. Omoyele Sowore, directing Amupitan to produce the documents next appearance.
The document seeks Tinubu’s INEC Form CF01 from his 1999 Lagos governorship bid and his 2023 presidential candidacy.
It also specifically requests an affidavit concerning lost certificates, listed among the materials filed for the 1999 race.
The subpoena is connected to the Federal High Court case in which Sowore faces charges over social media posts describing Tinubu as a “criminal.”
The document commands Amupitan to appear and testify for the defence, but it does not establish that the requested records have been produced.
What the Subpoena Requests
The subpoena duces tecum is addressed to Amupitan in his capacity as chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission.
It directs him to bring Tinubu’s Form CF01 filed as a candidate for Lagos State governor in 1999.
The requested 1999 material includes an “Affidavit in Respect of Lost Certificates,” according to the document shared by Sowore.
The subpoena also seeks Tinubu’s Form CF01 filed for the 2023 presidential election.
It identifies the proceedings as Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Omoyele Sowore, Charge No. FHC/CR/484/2025.
The document says Amupitan was commanded to attend Courtroom 5 of the Federal High Court in Abuja, before Justice Mohammed Garba Umar.
It lists October 26, 2026, at 9 a.m. as the appearance date and says he should attend from day to day until the cause is determined.
The copy is dated October 26, 2026, the same date stated for the required appearance.
As of November 9, the document’s listed appearance date has passed; the copy alone does not show whether Amupitan appeared or produced the records.
Subpoena: Connection to Sowore’s Criminal Case
Sowore is being prosecuted over posts made in August 2025 that referred to Tinubu as a “criminal.”
The case was brought by the Department of State Services, and the amended charge is marked FHC/ABJ/CR/484/2025.
Sowore has pleaded not guilty to the charges, which concern allegations involving his X and Facebook posts.
The defence’s subpoena seeks electoral documents as part of its case, though the available copy does not explain precisely how counsel intends to use each record.
Earlier reporting described the prosecution’s case as involving alleged cyberstalking and criminal defamation arising from the posts.
A subpoena requires the named recipient to attend and produce specified material; it does not itself determine what those records prove.
The document also directs Amupitan to testify on behalf of the defendant, placing the INEC chairman in the role of a potential defence witness.
The Records’ Potential Relevance
The two forms concern different election cycles: Tinubu’s 1999 governorship candidacy in Lagos and his 2023 presidential nomination.
The 1999 request specifically includes the lost-certificates affidavit, while the 2023 request covers Form CF01 for the presidential election.
The subpoena does not make a finding about the truthfulness or accuracy of information in either filing.
Nor does the document, by itself, establish wrongdoing or resolve past disputes concerning Tinubu’s educational records.
Its immediate significance is procedural: Sowore’s defence is seeking specified electoral filings from the commission for use in court.
Whether the court admits the records, what testimony Amupitan may give, and how the parties interpret the materials remain for proceedings before the judge.
No copy of the requested forms accompanied the subpoena transcription supplied for this report.
The subpoena therefore provides no basis for conclusions about what the forms contain beyond the categories of documents identified.
Questions About the Hearing Date
The subpoena’s date requires clarification because the document is dated October 26 and orders attendance on that same day.
The copy does not show whether it was served before the hearing, whether the date was changed, or whether the court considered the request.
It also does not establish whether the INEC chairman received the hearing notice reportedly served alongside it.
The document was shared by Sowore, while independent confirmation of its service and subsequent court handling was not available in the materials reviewed.
Any later ruling or court record could clarify whether the subpoena was acted upon and whether the documents were produced.
For now, the reported development is that the defence sought to compel the INEC chairman’s attendance and production of Tinubu’s past election forms.
