Questions Around Prof. Amupitan’s Suitability As INEC Chairman

The appointment of Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan, as Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of recent has sparked a wave of debate, especially among those concerned about the political dynamics leading up to Nigeria’s 2027 general elections. For some observers, the controversy is not merely about his academic credentials or administrative capability, but about perceived sentiments he has previously expressed on religious issues in Nigeria.

Those who raise these concerns often point to portions of Prof. Amupitan’s past legal writings that address violence against Christian communities in Nigeria, leading up to classification of Nigeria as a country where there is a Christian genocide.

Critics interpret aspects of those writings as reflecting a bias against the Muslim population, a perception that now fuels doubts about his neutrality as the head of Nigeria’s most important electoral institution.
These fears intensify when placed within the context of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and its expected 2027 presidential ticket. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Vice President Kashim Shettima—both Muslims—are widely assumed to be the party’s candidates once again. For those who believe Prof. Amupitan holds anti-Muslim sentiments, the concern is that he may be inherently uncomfortable with a Muslim–Muslim presidential ticket and could, even if unintentionally, approach the electoral process with bias.

From this perspective, some worry that his role as INEC chairman could influence the political atmosphere in ways that undermine the APC’s chances or cast doubt on the credibility of the electoral process. Critics argue that the head of INEC must be someone whose public record contains no suggestion, fair or unfair, of hostility toward any religious or political group.

However, it is important to emphasize that these concerns remain genuine as there are concrete reasons that Prof. Amupitan would act with bias in the conduct of his duties.

Since we are living in a country where elections are tense, where religion and politics are deeply intertwined, and where trust in institutions is fragile, perception can be as powerful as reality.

Ultimately, the debate surrounding Prof. Amupitan’s appointment reveals a broader national issue: Nigeria’s persistent struggle to build institutions that are not only impartial, but universally seen as impartial. Whether or not the fears about the INEC chairman are justified, they highlight the need for transparency, communication, and confidence-building measures as the 2027 elections approach.
In the end, Nigeria requires an electoral umpire that inspires confidence across party lines, across regions, and across religious divides. Any doubts reasonable or not must be addressed openly to preserve the integrity of the nation’s democratic process.

Given the above situation therefore, it is only fair for President Bola Tinubu to relieve Amupitan of his position as INEC Chairman and appoint someone who has no bias toward any religion. Only through this can people, particularly the Muslims in Nigeria, have confidence in the electoral umpire.