INEC chairman’s scheduled appearance in Sowore’s cyberbulling trial stalled

The cyberstalking trial of the African Action Congress (AAC) presidential candidate Omoyele Sowore stalled at the Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday earlier scheduled for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman, Joash Amupitan, to appear on subpoena.

The case was rescheduled for 17 November after court officials informed Mr Sowore and the prosecution lawyers at about 11 a.m. that Judge Mohammed Garba Umar could not sit because he was indisposed. About 28 other cases on the cause list were also adjourned.

The federal government, through the State Security Service (SSS), is prosecuting Mr Sowore, the publisher of Sahara Reporters, over social media posts in which he described President Bola Tinubu as a criminal.

The SSS had accused the activist of publishing false information about the president and charged him with cyberstalking under the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Act.

Mr Sowore pleaded not guilty to the charges and is currently presenting his defence before the court.

At the previous 9 November hearing, Judge Umar granted Mr Sowore’s request to summon All Progressives Congress (APC) figure Joe Igbokwe and INEC Chairman Joash Amupitan as defence witnesses.

The court subsequently adjourned the trial until Wednesday for the appearance of the two witnesses.

But it was unclear if any of the two men would have appeared on Wednesday had proceedings continued.

INEC opposes subpoena

Ahead of Wednesday’s hearing, INEC had opposed the subpoena summoning its chairman to produce President Tinubu’s electoral records from the 1999 Lagos governorship election and the 2023 presidential election.

The commission filed a motion on notice asking the court to set aside the subpoena on Tuesday.

In the motion, Mr Amupitan asked the court to set aside a subpoena dated 26 October and served on INEC headquarters in Abuja on 6 November.

The subpoena also required him to appear as a defence witness and produce two sets of electoral records.

These include Mr Tinubu’s INEC Form CF01 for the 1999 Lagos governorship election, including an affidavit concerning lost certificates. It also requested his Form CF01 for the 2023 presidential election.

INEC argued that the subpoena was invalid because it was not personally served on Mr Amupitan, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and professor of law at the University of Jos. It also said the document was served on INEC’s Litigation and Prosecution Department.

The commission also argued that he was not a party to the criminal case and that the requested documents did not exist in the form described. He therefore argued that he could not give evidence about them.

He also alleged that the request was made in bad faith and could embarrass the commission. He asked the court to set it aside.

How the case started

The case arose from the posts Mr Sowore published on X and Facebook in August 2025 calling President Tinubu a criminal in response to the comment the president made about corruption during a visit to Brazil.

The SSS subsequently wrote to X, demanding the suspension of Mr Sowore’s account. The agency also asked him to retract the posts and publish an apology, a request Mr Sowore rebuffed.

After Mr Sowore declined to comply, the agency filed five charges on 23 September 2025, initially listing Mr Sowore alongside X Corporation, formerly Twitter, and Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook, as co-defendants. But the prosecution subsequently removed the names of the tech firms, leaving Mr Sowore behind as the sole defendant.

The SSS eventually arraigned him on 2 December 2025, when he pleaded not guilty and was granted bail.

On 19 January, the prosecution amended the case, reducing the number of counts from five to two and officially removing X and Meta as defendants, leaving Mr Sowore as the sole defendant.

The amended charge accused him of cyberstalking under Section 24 of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition, Prevention, etc.) Amendment Act, 2024. The allegations concerned his publications on X and Facebook.

READ ALSO: INEC yet to receive court order on ADC, Tinubu, says Amupitan

The prosecution called one witness before closing its case in March. It also tendered evidence, including screenshots of Mr Sowore’s posts and video recordings.

On 8 May, Judge Umar dismissed Mr Sowore’s no-case submission, ruling that the prosecution had established a prima facie case requiring him to warrant him to enter defence.

Mr Sowore opened his defence in July, calling a lawyer and public commentator Deji Adeyanju as his first witness.

Other defence witnesses who have appeared are SSS official Uwem Davies, who appeared on subpoena, former member of Mr Sowore’s legal team, Wayne Elijah, and SSS investigator Michael Jego, and another subpoenaed witness.

Mr Davies testified about a letter the SSS sent to Mr Sowore concerning his social media posts. Mr Elijah appeared in connection with documents the defence sought to tender.

Mr Jego was called after the court ruled that an authorised SSS official could testify in place of the agency’s Director-General.

The latest development began in October when the court rejected an application to compel SSS Director General Oluwatosin Ajayi to appear personally as a defence witness. But, the judge held that another authorised official could testify on behalf of the agency.

The defence subsequently sought to compel the SSS’s lead lawyer, Mr Kehinde, to testify, but Judge Umar set aside the subpoena, citing the duty of professional confidentiality between lawyers and their clients.

The defence then requested subpoenas against Mr Igbokwe and Mr Amupitan. This time, the judge granted the application and directed both men to appear.