By Ajuluchukwu Brown, Abuja
“Every leadership of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is ultimately judged not by its promises but by the elections it conducts. Speeches may inspire confidence, policy documents may project ambition and technology may promise efficiency. Ultimately, however, elections remain the only credible report card of an electoral management body.
For Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan (SAN), the Commission’s early electoral outings have become the prism through which Nigerians are beginning to assess what the 2027 General Election could look like.
Although no two elections are identical, the governorship polls conducted under his leadership offer important clues about the Commission’s institutional direction. They point to an administration placing greater emphasis on logistics, technology, procedural transparency and stakeholder engagement, while confronting the enduring challenges of political violence, vote buying and public distrust that have long complicated Nigeria’s electoral process.
That direction became even clearer during Amupitan’s recent visit to the Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Enitan Ogunwusi, Ojaja II, ahead of the August 15 Osun governorship election. Far from a ceremonial courtesy call, the visit reflected a broader electoral philosophy. By making the Enuwa Palace his first official stop in Osun, the INEC chairman acknowledged an important democratic reality: credible elections are sustained not only by technology and regulations but also by public confidence, social legitimacy and institutions capable of calming political tensions before they escalate.
His description of the Osun election as “the most consequential off-cycle election” because it would serve as a benchmark for the 2027 General Election deserves close attention. Off-cycle elections have increasingly become laboratories for institutional learning. They allow INEC to test logistics, technology deployment, voter accreditation, result management and inter-agency coordination on a manageable scale before replicating successful strategies nationwide.
Seen from that perspective, Amupitan’s emphasis on preparedness appears less rhetorical than strategic. His disclosure that thousands of BVAS devices had been configured, backed by reserve units and strengthened Registration Area Centres, reflects a philosophy that operational failure should be anticipated and mitigated long before election day.
That represents an important institutional shift. Nigeria’s elections have often suffered less from legal deficiencies than from administrative lapses, late deployment of personnel, malfunctioning accreditation devices, logistical failures and inconsistent communication. Reducing such shortcomings may not eliminate political disputes, but it narrows the grounds upon which electoral credibility is questioned.
Equally significant is Amupitan’s repeated insistence on neutrality.
“We have no preferred candidate. We have no interest other than the integrity of the exercise.”
For an institution frequently accused of partisan bias, such assurances acquire meaning only when supported by observable conduct. Early impressions suggest an effort to project institutional independence through consistency rather than political messaging. Whether that perception survives until 2027 will depend less on public declarations than on the Commission’s willingness to apply identical standards regardless of political interests.
Yet even flawless administration cannot, by itself, guarantee credible elections. Perhaps the most consequential aspect of Amupitan’s address was not his discussion of BVAS or logistics but his assessment of the political environment itself.
His warning against political violence, voter intimidation and the monetisation of elections speaks directly to one of the most persistent threats confronting Nigeria’s democracy. As he observed, “democracy loses its essence when the ballot box is monetised or when citizens are intimidated from exercising their franchise.”
That warning resonates strongly in the current Osun political climate. Recent reports of rising political tension prompted the Ooni of Ife to describe the atmosphere as “unbearable,” urging political actors to exercise restraint while calling on INEC to remain impartial and inspire public confidence.
The monarch’s intervention appears especially significant when viewed alongside recent developments in the state. If there is one episode that illustrates the fragility of Nigeria’s electoral environment, it is the controversy surrounding the police operation at the residence of the Secretary to the Osun State Government, Teslim Igbalaye, barely weeks before the governorship election.
Police say the operation, based on intelligence, led to the recovery of cash, Permanent Voter Cards, voter registers and other materials now forming part of investigations into alleged electoral offences. The Osun State Government, however, has rejected that account, describing the operation as unlawful and politically motivated while insisting that the SSG was attending an INEC stakeholders’ meeting when the raid occurred.
Whatever the eventual legal outcome, the episode underscores a broader institutional challenge. Public confidence in elections depends not only on INEC’s neutrality but also on the perception that every institution involved in election security operates transparently, lawfully and without partisan bias. Allegations remain allegations until determined by the courts, but politically sensitive investigations inevitably heighten scrutiny of the electoral process.
More importantly, they remind Nigerians that electoral credibility is shaped long before polling day. Campaign rhetoric, security operations, judicial interventions and allegations of vote buying all influence public confidence before the first ballot is cast. This helps explain why Amupitan’s engagement with the Ooni deserves closer examination.
Traditional rulers exercise no constitutional authority over elections, yet their moral influence remains considerable. Their ability to promote restraint, discourage inflammatory rhetoric and encourage peaceful participation often complements the work of electoral officials and security agencies.
Amupitan’s appeal therefore reflects an appreciation that electoral legitimacy is built not only inside polling units and collation centres but also within communities where political competition frequently becomes intensely personal. Equally notable is the Commission’s increasingly visible stakeholder engagement.
Rather than limiting communication to formal press briefings, the chairman has sought sustained dialogue with traditional rulers, political parties, civil society organisations and security agencies. Such engagement cannot eliminate disputes, but it reduces uncertainty by clarifying expectations, procedures and responsibilities well before election day.
That approach may become even more valuable as preparations intensify for 2027. The next general election will involve operational demands far beyond those of any off-cycle governorship contest. Managing millions of voters across thousands of polling units while deploying technology nationwide will test not only logistics but also institutional resilience.
If the recent governorship elections are rehearsals, every lesson learned today becomes an investment in tomorrow’s capacity. Perhaps the greatest challenge confronting INEC is not simply conducting credible elections but convincing every participant that the process is impartial.
Perception often shapes legitimacy as much as procedure. This explains the Commission’s consistent emphasis on transparency alongside neutrality. Technology such as BVAS and the IReV portal undoubtedly strengthens accountability. Yet technology cannot substitute for institutional trust.
Trust is accumulated gradually through consistent conduct. It is earned when logistics improve, accreditation functions efficiently, results are transparently managed and the Commission maintains equal distance from every political party. Viewed through that lens, the significance of INEC’s early elections under Professor Amupitan extends beyond individual outcomes.
Rather than isolated contests, they represent incremental efforts to rebuild public confidence ahead of the considerably greater challenge that awaits in 2027. None of this suggests that Nigeria’s electoral problems have disappeared.
Vote buying remains widespread. Political violence continues to threaten democratic participation. Election litigation remains an almost inevitable extension of political competition, while public scepticism towards institutions persists. Even so, institutions are judged less by the absence of problems than by the consistency of their responses. If INEC sustains its present emphasis on operational readiness, technological innovation, stakeholder engagement and institutional neutrality, it could approach the 2027 General Election with stronger public confidence than many expected.
In many respects, this explains why Amupitan’s visit to the Ooni may prove more consequential than a routine courtesy call. His appeal for traditional rulers to discourage violence, vote buying and intimidation acknowledged a fundamental truth about Nigerian democracy: institutions alone cannot guarantee credible elections. They require a political culture that prizes restraint over confrontation, accountability over expediency and civic responsibility over partisan advantage.
His warning that “democracy loses its essence when the ballot box is monetised” was therefore more than a comment on the Osun governorship election. It was a broader reflection on the democratic challenge confronting Nigeria as it steadily approaches 2027. Ultimately, however, INEC alone cannot determine the credibility of Nigeria’s democracy. Political parties must discipline their supporters. Security agencies must act professionally and impartially. Traditional rulers must continue promoting peace. Civil society must sustain independent oversight, while citizens themselves must reject inducement and insist that their votes remain expressions of conscience rather than commodities for sale.
Technology may protect the mechanics of voting, but only collective political responsibility can preserve the spirit of democracy. That, perhaps, is the enduring lesson emerging from Professor Joash Amupitan’s early stewardship and the standard against which the Commission will ultimately be judged when Nigerians return to the polls in 2027.
