Pressure is steadily mounting on the leadership of Nigeria’s electoral body following a strong call by Opposition Watch Nigeria (OWN) for the immediate resignation of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan (SAN), over allegations of bias and improper interference in the internal affairs of opposition political parties.
The demand was made public in a statement issued on Sunday in Abuja by OWN’s spokesperson, Aisha Bello, who described the unfolding situation as nothing short of “democracy under siege.” In a move that appears designed to galvanise public opinion, the group has also launched a social media campaign under the hashtag #AmupitanMustResign, urging Nigerians to speak out against what it views as a dangerous erosion of electoral neutrality.
Opposition Watch Nigeria, a self-described non-partisan advocacy organisation committed to democratic accountability, the rule of law, and transparent governance, said recent actions attributed to INEC under Prof. Amupitan’s leadership have gravely compromised the Commission’s impartiality.
According to the group, these actions have not only undermined public trust in the electoral umpire but have also raised serious concerns about the credibility of future elections in the country.
“The role of INEC is to regulate and conduct elections, not to arbitrate or impose decisions on the internal governance of political parties,” Bello stated in the release. “By repeatedly overstepping its constitutional bounds, the current leadership has eroded trust in the Commission and undermined the integrity of the democratic process.”
At the heart of OWN’s allegations are what it described as “selective and troubling interventions” by INEC in the affairs of opposition parties, particularly the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The group argues that these interventions suggest a pattern of conduct that goes beyond administrative oversight and veers into partisan interference.
OWN cited several cases involving the SDP, noting that Nigeria’s Supreme Court has, on multiple occasions, reportedly reprimanded INEC for meddling in leadership and nomination disputes within the party. According to the advocacy group, the apex court has consistently warned that such actions amount to a gross overreach of INEC’s constitutional mandate.
“These judicial pronouncements clearly affirm the autonomy of political parties in managing their internal affairs,” OWN said, adding that INEC’s continued involvement in such disputes runs contrary to established legal principles and court decisions.
Beyond the SDP, the group also raised alarm over INEC’s handling of internal conflicts within the PDP, Nigeria’s main opposition party. OWN alleged that the Commission’s actions, including what it described as conflicting recognition of leadership factions and “questionable invitations to meetings,” have worsened divisions within the party rather than helped to resolve them.
“These actions create the perception that INEC is taking sides in opposition party disputes, with the apparent aim of weakening their structures ahead of future elections,” Bello said. She warned that such perceptions, whether intended or not, could have far-reaching consequences for Nigeria’s democratic stability.
The group stressed that the credibility of any electoral process rests heavily on the perceived neutrality of the body charged with conducting it. According to OWN, once the electoral umpire is seen as biased, public confidence collapses, voter apathy increases, and the legitimacy of elected governments comes under question.
“Impartiality is the foundation of credible elections,” the statement emphasised. “When the umpire is perceived as playing for one side, democracy itself is put at risk.”
OWN further warned that any sustained perception of bias by INEC could tilt the political playing field in favour of the ruling party, weaken multiparty competition, and ultimately undermine the democratic gains Nigeria has made since the return to civilian rule. The group described this scenario as a “dangerous path” that the country must urgently avoid.
Reiterating its position, the organisation maintained that opposition parties such as the SDP and PDP have a constitutional right to manage and resolve their internal disputes in accordance with their party constitutions and internal mechanisms, without interference from external bodies.
“The Chairman’s continued stay in office under these circumstances is untenable,” Bello declared. “It poses a clear and present danger to the conduct of free and fair elections in Nigeria.”
In addition to demanding Prof. Amupitan’s resignation, OWN called on a broad coalition of stakeholders to take action. The group urged civil society organisations, professional bodies, the media, and members of the international community to closely monitor the situation and lend their voices to the call for accountability within the electoral commission.
According to OWN, safeguarding the independence of INEC is not just an institutional matter but a national responsibility that requires vigilance from all segments of society.
“Patriots must resist any attempt to weaponise state institutions against opposition voices,” the statement concluded. “Nigeria’s democracy cannot afford an electoral umpire perceived to be working for one side.”
As of the time of filing this report, INEC had not issued an official response to the allegations or the call for Prof. Amupitan’s resignation. However, political observers say the controversy is likely to intensify debate around electoral reforms, institutional independence, and the role of INEC in party politics, especially as the country looks ahead to future election cycles.
For many Nigerians, the unfolding situation raises fundamental questions about trust, fairness, and the health of the nation’s democracy. Whether the call by Opposition Watch Nigeria will translate into concrete action remains to be seen, but the group’s intervention has undoubtedly added a new layer of scrutiny to the leadership of the country’s most critical democratic institution.
