Several key Development Partners supporting Nigeria’s electoral process have issued a strong caution to the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, SAN, urging him to strictly adhere to the provisions of the Electoral Act in handling candidate substitutions ahead of the upcoming general elections.
The partners, who have longer collaborated with INEC on electoral reforms, capacity building, and transparency initiatives, emphasised that the Commission must remain guided solely by the law and not yield to any external pressures, including alleged “presidential or big-man orders.”
Findings revealed that the INEC Development Partners comprise multilateral and international agencies such as United Nations Development Programme, World Bank, European Union, Commonwealth Secretariat and Economic Community of West African States, African Union Commission, Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa, European Centre for Electoral Support, and Foundations and Democracy-Support Organisations.
Others are: International Foundation for Electoral Systems, International IDEA, Ford Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Westminster Foundation for Democracy, International Republican Institute, and DAI Global
Their supports, it was gathered, typically cover election management and technical assistance, staff training and capacity building, voter education, election technology support, research and post-election review processes and democratic governance programmes.
Sources close to the matter told journalists that the caution came during high-level engagements and consultative meetings amid growing controversy over the All Progressives Congress (APC) National Working Committee’s (NWC) recent attempt to substitute approximately 26 National Assembly candidates after the conclusion of INEC-monitored primaries.
A joint statement issued by representatives of major Development Partners, including officials from international democracy-support organisations, reportedly stressed the need for INEC to uphold the integrity of the primary process and the official election timetable.
“INEC must not subvert the clear provisions of the Electoral Act regarding candidate nominations and substitutions. The Commission’s role as an impartial umpire demands that it prioritizes legal compliance over any partisan or external influences,” the statement partly read.
One senior official from a development partner organization, who spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, said, “Professor Amupitan has a historic opportunity to strengthen public confidence in the electoral system.
“He must resist any attempt to use internal party appeal committees as a backdoor to rewrite primary outcomes after the stipulated deadlines.
“The law is clear, and INEC must enforce it without fear or favor — not presidential directives, not influential godfathers.”
The partners further warned that any perception of compromise could erode the gains made in previous electoral cycles and invite widespread litigation that might destabilize the electoral timeline.
The caution arises against the backdrop of the APC’s submission of a revised list of National Assembly candidates to INEC.
The party claimed the changes, affecting senatorial and House of Representatives aspirants across several states, were based on recommendations from its Primary Election Appeal Committee following the resolution of petitions.
Critics, including legal experts and affected candidates, argue that these substitutions violate Section 33 of the Electoral Act, which restricts post-submission changes except in cases of death or voluntary withdrawal.
They also cite potential breaches of fair hearing under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
INEC’s timetable had designated a specific window for the conduct of party primaries, including the resolution of all disputes arising therefrom. Actions beyond this period are viewed by many stakeholders as inconsistent with the binding schedule.
The Development Partners reportedly commended Professor Amupitan’s previous commitments to electoral integrity but stressed the need for visible independence.
“Development Partners stand ready to continue supporting INEC’s efforts toward credible elections. However, this support is predicated on the Commission’s unwavering commitment to the rule of law,” another source privy to the discussions said.
*INEC’s Expected Response
As of press time, INEC had not issued an official response to the partners and other rights groups’ caution.
Professor Amupitan, who assumed office last year, has previously emphasised his commitment to transparency and legal compliance in public statements.
Political observers, however, note that how the Commission handles the current APC substitutions — and similar requests from other parties — could set the tone for the entire pre-election period.
Legal experts also predict that aggrieved candidates are likely to approach the courts for redress if INEC is perceived to acquiesce to unlawful changes.
This development underscores the high stakes and intense scrutiny surrounding Nigeria’s electoral umpire as the country prepares for another major democratic exercise.
Stakeholders across the board continue to call on the INEC to remain an unbiased guardian of the electoral process.