Pressure on the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Prof. Joash Amupitan, to resign from office is mounting rapidly, with opposition political parties, civil society organisations and members of the public intensifying their denunciations of the electoral chief over allegations of bias in favour of the ruling All Progressives Congress, as indications emerge that the calls for his ouster may be difficult to resist if the momentum continues to build ahead of the 2027 general elections.
The controversy surrounding Amupitan deepened significantly after INEC, barely two weeks after the chairman publicly pledged neutrality at a stakeholder consultative meeting, announced that it had rescinded its recognition of former Senate President David Mark and former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola as the chairman and secretary, respectively, of the African Democratic Congress. The commission's decision, which it said was informed by its interpretation of a Court of Appeal order directing parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum, was widely condemned by the opposition as a partisan interference that exposed INEC's alignment with the presidency and the ruling party.
The already volatile situation was further inflamed when Nigerians unearthed what appeared to be old social media posts on X allegedly linked to Amupitan, which showed the INEC chairman engaging in partisan political conversations and appearing to express support for President Bola Tinubu and the APC, including a post in which the words "victory is sure" featured prominently. INEC, through Amupitan's Chief Press Secretary and Media Adviser, Adedayo Oketola, flatly denied ownership of the account, describing the allegation as entirely baseless, a total fabrication and a figment of the imagination of its promoters. However, the denial failed to douse the flames of public outrage, with many Nigerians questioning how the chairman's email address and phone number could have been linked to an account the commission now disowned.
The Country Director of ActionAid Nigeria, Andrew Mamedu, joined those calling for Amupitan's resignation, arguing that even if the posts in question were made before his appointment and in a personal capacity, the proximity of those statements to the 2023 general elections raised serious and legitimate questions about the perceived neutrality of a man now charged with overseeing Nigeria's next presidential election. He said that the credibility of Nigeria's electoral system depended not only on actual impartiality but equally on public confidence in the integrity of those who led it, and that INEC's denial in the face of mounting digital evidence had raised more questions than it answered. "While individuals are entitled to political opinions, these actions occurred within the immediate political environment of the 2023 elections. That proximity is exactly why Nigerians now struggle with the perception of neutrality," Mamedu said.
Not everyone, however, shares the view that Amupitan should go. Public affairs analyst Victor Oluwafemi cautioned that the calls for resignation, while understandable, were premature and risked setting a dangerous precedent in which leaders of critical national institutions could be removed through public agitation rather than through the constitutional procedures designed for that purpose. He urged those demanding the chairman's head to critically examine whether their calls were grounded in verifiable institutional breaches or whether they were driven primarily by political positioning. "The positions recently advanced by ADC and the Supreme Council for Shari'ah in Nigeria, if not exercised with caution, risk projecting a troubling precedent that leadership within critical national institutions can be influenced through public agitation rather than constitutional procedure," he warned.
The constitutional path to removing an INEC chairman is a demanding one. Section 157 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, stipulates that the President can only remove the chairman of INEC if the removal is supported by a two-thirds majority of the Senate, and only for offences relating to misconduct or an inability to carry out the responsibilities of the office. Given that the APC controls the Senate, any such constitutional process remains a remote prospect under the current political arrangement. Nevertheless, analysts point to historical precedents in which sustained public pressure and mass action have forced out public officials facing similar crises of legitimacy, and warn that Amupitan's future in office may ultimately depend on whether the opposition's threatened mass action translates into a broad enough movement to make his position untenable.
0 Comments