As Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, SAN, approaches his first anniversary as Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), questions over the credibility, independence and preparedness of the electoral body remain at the centre of Nigeria’s political conversation.
Amupitan was sworn in as INEC Chairman on October 23, 2025, after President Bola Tinubu nominated him on October 9 and the Senate confirmed his appointment on October 16. He succeeded Professor Mahmood Yakubu.
In an opinion article, Tunde Olusunle, PhD, examines Amupitan’s first year in office and asks whether the INEC chairman has done enough to earn public confidence ahead of the 2027 general elections.
A Difficult Assignment From the Beginning
According to Olusunle, Amupitan inherited an electoral commission operating under considerable public suspicion.
Questions about the independence of INEC emerged even before he assumed office, with critics raising concerns about his appointment by a sitting president and allegations of possible partisan influence.
The author argues that the controversy reflects a broader problem surrounding Nigeria’s electoral system: every INEC chairman appointed by an incumbent president is likely to face questions about whether the commission can operate independently of the government that appointed its leadership.
For Amupitan, the challenge is therefore not only to remain neutral but also to convince Nigerians that the commission is neutral.
Concerns Over INEC Data
Another issue highlighted in the article was the controversy surrounding access to INEC data.
Olusunle referred to comments attributed to Lere Adeyinka, spokesperson to FCT Minister Nyesom Wike, concerning access to electoral data.
The article argues that such claims naturally generate concern because of the sensitivity of Nigeria’s voters’ register, BVAS infrastructure and other electoral databases.
According to Olusunle, INEC responded by clarifying its data-management protocols and stressing that electoral data remains under the commission’s control.
Kogi Polling-Ward Controversy
The article also discusses allegations from a group in Kogi State that INEC was creating additional polling wards in Kogi West and Kogi Central while allegedly neglecting Kogi East.
Olusunle disputes the interpretation that the process amounted to deliberate discrimination.
He argues that the creation or review of polling areas was linked to issues such as population growth, voter density, accessibility and the distances voters have to travel to polling units.
The author says Kogi East was not necessarily excluded but was at a different stage of the verification and consultation process.
He therefore characterises the controversy as a possible case of different stages of an administrative process being interpreted as deliberate discrimination.
INEC’s Electoral Reforms
A significant part of Olusunle’s argument centres on what he describes as reforms being pursued under Amupitan.
Among the areas highlighted are proposals aimed at strengthening penalties for vote buying and addressing violent political rhetoric.
The author argues that vote buying and political violence remain major challenges to Nigeria’s electoral system and that attempts to address them could have wider implications for electoral credibility.
INEC has also been expanding its operational preparations for the 2027 elections.
In September, Amupitan announced plans for a real-time election readiness tracker designed to give the commission’s leadership immediate visibility into preparations across Nigeria’s 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory. The system is intended to track areas including logistics, recruitment and training of ad hoc staff, technology and other election preparations.
The initiative is part of INEC’s broader effort to reduce last-minute operational problems ahead of the 2027 polls.
Technology and IReV
Olusunle also points to efforts to strengthen the technological infrastructure supporting elections.
The article mentions tighter audit trails for the IReV portal, training of election personnel and earlier deployment of election materials.
The author argues that the effectiveness of such measures will ultimately be judged by how they perform during actual elections rather than by announcements or policy documents.
Elections Conducted Under Amupitan
One of the central arguments in the article is that Amupitan’s record should be assessed partly through elections already conducted during his tenure.
The author points to the Anambra, Ekiti and Osun governorship elections, as well as the FCT area council elections, as examples of electoral exercises conducted under his leadership.
The article particularly focuses on the August 15, 2026 Osun governorship election, presenting it as an important test of INEC’s ability to operate amid intense political pressure.
Olusunle argues that the result demonstrated that the electoral commission could withstand political pressure and declare results based on votes cast at polling units.
An independent commentary published by The Sun also described the Osun election as a significant test of Amupitan’s leadership, although assessments of electoral credibility remain matters of public and political debate.
September 19 By-Elections Another Test
Attention is now turning to the September 19, 2026 by-elections, which Olusunle describes as another important test for INEC.
Although smaller than presidential or governorship elections, by-elections can be politically sensitive because of the intensity of competition within individual constituencies.
The author argues that the September contests will provide another opportunity to assess INEC’s preparation, deployment of technology and commitment to due process.
The Independence Question
Despite the positive assessment contained in the article, Olusunle acknowledges that questions about INEC’s independence have not disappeared.
The central issue, according to the author, is that Nigerians will continue to scrutinise every major decision taken by the commission because of the political environment surrounding the 2027 presidential election.
The author argues that Amupitan faces a dual responsibility: to be neutral and to be visibly neutral.
That distinction is important because electoral credibility depends not only on the actual conduct of an election but also on whether voters, parties and candidates believe that the process was impartial.
Why Osun Matters
For Olusunle, the Osun election provides one of the strongest arguments in favour of giving Amupitan’s leadership a fair assessment.
The article recalls the high-profile involvement of APC leaders and governors in the election campaign and argues that INEC nevertheless declared the result produced by the votes.
The author presents this as evidence that the commission can resist political pressure when necessary.
However, that remains an interpretation by the author rather than an independently established conclusion that settles all questions about INEC’s independence.
Amupitan’s Legal Background
Olusunle also points to Amupitan’s professional background as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and academic.
The author argues that his legal experience could be useful in an electoral environment where disputes frequently move from polling units to tribunals and ultimately to the courts.
The INEC chairman’s official biography similarly describes him as an academic, legal practitioner and administrator, with expertise in law and corporate governance.
Trust Must Be Earned
The broader argument of the article is that public confidence in INEC cannot be created by the chairman alone.
Olusunle argues that political parties must also accept responsibility by fielding credible candidates and respecting electoral outcomes.
Security agencies, according to the article’s argument, must protect voters and polling processes, while the media must report accurately and citizens must reject inducement and intimidation.
In that sense, electoral credibility is presented as a collective responsibility rather than something that can be delivered solely by the INEC chairman.
The Final Test Is 2027
With the 2027 general elections approaching, Amupitan’s first year in office is only an early chapter in his tenure.
INEC is already intensifying preparations, including technological and operational planning for the general elections scheduled for January 16 and February 6, 2027.
The question of whether Nigerians can trust Amupitan therefore remains open to continuing scrutiny.
Olusunle’s conclusion is favourable: he argues that Amupitan’s actions over his first year provide reasons for cautious confidence, while acknowledging that trust in an electoral umpire cannot be granted permanently.
Ultimately, that confidence will be tested repeatedly — through the September 19 by-elections, subsequent off-cycle elections and, most importantly, the conduct of the 2027 general elections.
