Odds Mount Against Amupitan as Calls for INEC Chairman’s Exit Intensify

Pressure is building on the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Amupitan, as allegations of partisanship continue to fuel demands for his resignation.

Growing public criticism, particularly claims that he is biased in favour of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), has placed the electoral umpire under scrutiny. Civil society groups and opposition figures have increasingly called for him to step down, citing concerns over the credibility of the commission ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The Country Director of ActionAid Nigeria, Andrew Mamedu, joined the call, pointing to alleged past social media activity suggesting political alignment. According to him, screenshots circulating online indicate that Amupitan may have expressed support for APC-related narratives before his appointment—raising questions about his neutrality.

However, public affairs analyst Victor Oluwafemi has cautioned against hasty conclusions, urging adherence to due process. He warned that forcing out key public officials through public pressure rather than constitutional means could undermine democratic stability.

Amupitan had earlier reassured stakeholders during a consultative meeting that INEC would remain neutral under his leadership. He also stressed that the commission would enforce electoral laws strictly and act against any violations of guidelines or constitutional provisions.

Despite these assurances, controversy deepened after INEC revoked the recognition of Senator David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola as national officers of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), citing its interpretation of a Court of Appeal ruling. The decision angered the party’s leadership, which subsequently demanded Amupitan’s resignation over alleged bias.

The situation escalated further when opposition leaders formally submitted a letter calling for his removal. This was followed by renewed online scrutiny, with critics resurfacing alleged past statements linking him to support for President Bola Tinubu and the APC.

While the President holds the power to initiate the removal of the INEC chairman, the Constitution requires a two-thirds majority of the Senate to approve such action on grounds of misconduct or incapacity. This makes an immediate removal unlikely.

Nevertheless, history suggests that sustained public pressure and protests could influence the outcome, as seen in similar cases involving public office holders.

Responding to the allegations, Amupitan, through his media aide Adedayo Oketola, dismissed them as baseless and fabricated. He maintained that the claims were the product of imagination and lacked any factual foundation.

Public debate, however, has continued, especially on social media. Some Nigerians have questioned INEC’s denial of links between the chairman and the controversial accounts, demanding clearer explanations to restore confidence in the electoral body.

Mamedu emphasized that even if the alleged posts were made in a personal capacity before Amupitan’s appointment, their proximity to recent elections raises valid concerns about perceived neutrality.

He added that the integrity of Nigeria’s electoral system depends not only on actual impartiality but also on public trust in those who lead it.

Oluwafemi, however, reiterated that while accountability is essential, the timing and tone of the resignation demands risk setting a dangerous precedent where leadership of key institutions is shaped by public agitation rather than constitutional processes.