The Federal High Court in Abuja has nullified a subpoena issued by activist Omoyele Sowore against Akinlolu Kehinde, lawyer to the State Security Service (SSS), ruling that legal practitioners are generally protected from being compelled to reveal confidential communications exchanged with their clients.
In a ruling delivered on Monday, November 9, 2026, Justice Mohammed Umar held that lawyers have a professional obligation to maintain the confidentiality of information obtained while representing their clients.
He stressed that such communications are protected under the lawyer-client relationship and must be respected during judicial proceedings.The judge, however, noted that the protection is not absolute, explaining that a lawyer could be compelled to testify in limited circumstances, particularly where the evidence concerns an uncontested matter or would not prejudice the interests of the client.
Consequently, the court set aside the subpoena issued against Kehinde, rejecting the defence’s attempt to compel the SSS lawyer to testify in Sowore’s ongoing alleged cyberbullying trial. However, the defence secured a significant development in another aspect of the proceedings.
Following the ruling, Sowore’s lawyer, Ruben Adakole, informed the court of the defence team’s intention to subpoena the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Amupitan, and prominent All Progressives Congress (APC) chieftain, Joe Igbokwe, as defence witnesses.
Justice Umar granted the application and directed that subpoenas be issued to both individuals.Find Legal Help
The move is part of the defence’s efforts to obtain President Bola Tinubu’s electoral records from INEC and question Igbokwe over his alleged involvement in reactions to Sowore’s controversial social media publication, which forms part of the ongoing trial.
According to the subpoena, Professor Amupitan is being summoned in his official capacity to produce electoral documents relating to President Tinubu that are in the custody of the electoral commission.
The requested documents include Tinubu’s nomination records for the 1999 Lagos State governorship election, particularly an affidavit concerning lost certificates, as well as his nomination documents for the 2023 presidential election.
Beyond producing the records, the INEC chairman is also expected to testify as a defence witness regarding the requested documents.
The defence’s application appears connected to its attempt to examine whether Tinubu’s official electoral declarations provide a factual basis for Sowore’s disputed description of the President.
However, the activist has not publicly explained in full the reasons behind his decision to summon the INEC chairman and Igbokwe.The subpoena does not suggest that Amupitan personally received Tinubu’s earlier electoral submissions or was involved in any alleged wrongdoing. Rather, his proposed appearance concerns official documents reportedly held by INEC.
Meanwhile, Igbokwe is being summoned in connection with testimony previously given by SSS investigating officer Michael Jego.
During his evidence, Jego told the court that Igbokwe was among those who reacted to Sowore’s social media publication and called on the activist to retract his statement.
The defence subsequently indicated its intention to call Igbokwe to explain his reaction to the publication and address the account attributed to him by the investigating officer.
Although the precise questions the defence intends to ask him have not been disclosed, his proposed testimony is expected to touch on the reactions to Sowore’s statement already introduced into evidence.
Importantly, both Amupitan and Igbokwe are being summoned strictly as witnesses and not as accused persons in the case.
Similarly, the court’s decision to issue the subpoenas does not amount to a finding against President Tinubu or establish that the requested documents and testimonies will support Sowore’s defence. It simply allows the defence to pursue the evidence as part of its case.
Following the proceedings, Justice Umar adjourned the matter until November 11, 2026, when the subpoenaed defence witnesses are expected to appear.
The trial will therefore continue on two separate fronts: the court has rejected the attempt to compel the SSS lawyer to testify on matters protected by professional confidentiality, while granting the defence permission to seek testimony from the INEC chairman and Joe Igbokwe.