10/11/2025
WEEKEND MUSINGS
âWHEN THE UMPIRE WAS ONCE ON THE PITCH - THE CURIOUS CASE OF PROF. AMUPITAN AS INEC CHAIRMANâ
I awake this Saturday morning with a troubled spirit, for the serenity of our democracy has been shaken by a development both bold and disquieting: the appointment of Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan as Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
On paper, it is a routine constitutional exercise, yet beneath the veil lies a troubling paradox: the possible politicisation of the very institution that should be the guardian of neutrality.
The Constitution is clear in spirit if not in letter.
Sections 153 and 154 of the 1999 Constitution empowers the President to appoint the INEC Chairman, subject to Senate confirmation and consultation with the Council of State.
Beyond procedure, however, lies the deeper moral clause, that whoever occupies the office must be a person of unquestionable integrity and apolitical bearing. Sections 156 (1) of the Constitution.
An umpire, after all, must never have worn the jersey of any team.
The legitimacy of INEC does not rest merely on constitutional formalities, but on public faith that its chair stands above politics, beyond suspicion, and immune to partisan gratitude.
This faith now stands on trial. Reports and speculations suggest that Prof. Amupitan was once a member; formally or informally , of President Bola Ahmed Tinubuâs legal team during the 2023 election tribunal proceedings.
Though no conclusive evidence has been publicly tendered, the absence of transparency itself is troubling. In matters as delicate as electoral integrity, perception is nearly as decisive as proof.
If indeed he once advised or represented the President, three damning implications arise:
1. Conflict of Interest: Can a man who once defended a political candidate now credibly referee elections involving that same political interest?
2. Appearance of Bias: Even the most impartial acts will be shadowed by suspicion.
3. Dangerous Precedent: It lowers the bar for future appointments , inviting politicians to capture the very institution meant to restrain them.
THE CORE QUESTION : IS PROF. AMUPITAN APOLITICAL?
Public commentary already alleges that Prof. Amupitan is a card-carrying member of the APC. True or not, such a cloud cannot hover over the head of the electoral umpire.
The Constitution may not expressly use the word apolitical, but the spirit of âunquestionable integrityâ carries that very demand. The guardian of democracy must be seen to belong to no camp.
The Senate holds the power of confirmation, but will it use it?
Our experience suggests otherwise. Too often, political alignment eclipses national conscience. Should the legislature once again bow to executive will, the wound inflicted on public trust will fester for generations.
What is at stake here is not merely one manâs appointment, but the very independence of our electoral machinery; the soul of the democracy itself.
So here lies the national irony: the man who once stood at the bar defending the Presidentâs mandate may soon stand atop the nationâs ballot box to declare the next.
It is as though the referee, after officiating one match, joins the winning team, and then returns to officiate the next. Who will trust his whistle?
If the Senate confirms Prof. Amupitan without rigorous scrutiny, history will remember this day as the moment Nigeria blurred the sacred line between politics and impartiality.
Let us hope, at the very least, that conscience still finds a seat in the Red Chamber.
Signed
Sir ifeanyi Ejiofor, Esq. (KSC)
October 11, 2025
