By James Aduku Odaudu, PhD
By any objective standard, the recent call by the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC) for the removal of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)”, Prof. Joash Amupitan is troubling—not just for its content, but for what it portends for Nigeria’s democracy.
At stake is a fundamental principle: should professional work, undertaken years before public appointment, be weaponised to undermine independent institutions? If the answer is yes, then Nigeria risks dismantling the very foundations of competence, fairness, and intellectual freedom upon which democratic governance rests.
The controversy centres on a legal brief authored by Prof. Amupitan in 2020, long before his appointment as INEC Chairman. The brief, commissioned by international organisations, was a professional legal analysis of allegations of mass violence in Nigeria. As a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and constitutional lawyer, Prof. Amupitan was well within his professional remit to offer expert opinion on a matter of international legal concern.
Lawyers, academics, and policy experts routinely produce work that interrogates difficult, even uncomfortable realities. Such work does not automatically translate into personal belief, religious prejudice, or political intent. To argue otherwise is to misunderstand the nature of professional service and to punish intellectual honesty.
If legal opinions are retrospectively criminalised or politicised, then Nigeria sends a chilling message to its best minds: think carefully before you speak truth to power or engage global discourse.
Prof. Amupitan’s appointment was not accidental, nor was it cosmetic. INEC is a constitutionally driven institution whose effectiveness depends on deep legal knowledge, respect for due process, and institutional independence. Prof. Amupitan brings to the office:
Profound expertise in constitutional and electoral law
Years of experience in legal scholarship and public policy analysis
A reputation for intellectual rigour and independence, essential for an electoral umpire
Nigeria does not need a populist at the helm of INEC; it needs a jurist who understands the Constitution, electoral jurisprudence, and the delicate balance between law, politics, and national stability. On these counts, Prof. Amupitan is eminently qualified.
In a constitutional democracy, public officials are entitled to the presumption of good faith until evidence proves otherwise. Since assuming office, Prof. Amupitan has not been accused of electoral malpractice, partisan conduct, or abuse of power. No court has indicted him. No credible evidence has been presented showing bias in the discharge of his duties.
To demand his removal based on conjecture or past professional work is not only unfair—it is dangerous. It lowers the threshold for institutional sabotage and replaces due process with pressure politics.
Ironically, MURIC’s position does more harm than good to the Muslim community it claims to defend. By suggesting that critique of banditry or terrorism is an attack on Islam, the organisation inadvertently projects criminal behaviour onto an entire religious group.
Banditry, insurgency, and terrorism are crimes, not articles of faith. Millions of Nigerian Muslims are victims of insecurity themselves and have no affiliation with violent groups. Any narrative that blurs this distinction reinforces stereotypes and undermines interfaith harmony.
Advocacy should protect communities, not entangle them in criminality by implication.
INEC’s credibility is too important to be subjected to religious or sectional pressure. Once faith-based organisations begin to demand the removal of electoral officials without evidence of misconduct, Nigeria steps onto a slippery slope—one where elections become hostage to religious suspicion rather than constitutional order.
Civil society has a right to speak. But that right must be exercised responsibly, especially when national institutions are involved.
Let INEC Work
Nigeria stands at a sensitive democratic juncture. What the country needs is a calm, focused electoral commission allowed to prepare for credible elections—not a distracted leadership fighting off speculative allegations.
Prof. Joash Amupitan should be allowed to do the job he was appointed to do. He should be judged by his actions in office, not by professional work undertaken years earlier. Anything less undermines fairness, weakens institutions, and politicises religion in ways Nigeria can ill afford.
In defending due process and professional integrity today, Nigeria protects its democracy tomorrow.
Dr James Odaudu, a development administrator and communication consultant, can be reached at jamesaduku@gmail.com and 08057314611 (WhatsApp only)
Uncategorized5 years ago
Aviation3 years ago