2027: INEC, neutrality and public confidence

IT is hardly surprising that fresh appointments involving the Independent National Electoral Commission and President Bola Tinubu ahead of the 2027 general elections have stirred controversy. With public confidence in the electoral umpire already badly eroded, even appointments that may be administratively defensible can become a source of suspicion. In an election as consequential as the next one, perception is almost as important as procedure.

A former Administrative Secretary at INEC’s Lagos office, Oluyemi Adeyemi-Showunmi, was redeployed as Director of Electoral Operations, succeeding Isah Gummi, who was moved to the Voter Registry Department.

However, the discovery that Adeyemi-Showunmi is married to Segun Showunmi, a spokesman for the Tinubu/Shettima 2027 Presidential Campaign Council, has provoked objections from opposition parties, civil society organisations and other Nigerians.

Some have interpreted the appointment as a deliberate attempt to compromise the electoral process and confer an undue advantage on the ruling All Progressives Congress.

While such allegations should not be treated as facts, they expose the sensitivity surrounding the management of an election in which the incumbent President is seeking another term.

The controversy is compounded by another set of nominations. Tinubu recently forwarded the names of four national commissioners and two Resident Electoral Commissioners to the Senate for confirmation to fill vacancies in the commission.

One of the nominees, Mustapha Aliyu, is the brother of Sokoto State Governor Ahmed Aliyu, who is seeking re-election in 2027. His nomination as the North-West representative has also attracted opposition.

Unlike the redeployment of a career civil servant, the nomination of a national commissioner is a presidential appointment requiring legislative scrutiny. The Senate must therefore examine the nominees beyond the routine exercise of confirming names submitted by the Presidency.

Mustapha Aliyu’s relationship with a sitting governor seeking another term raises legitimate questions about potential conflicts of interest and the appearance of political influence. The same rigorous scrutiny should apply to all the nominees.

As for Adeyemi-Showunmi, her appointment must be considered within the framework governing the public service. Career officers are routinely deployed to positions of responsibility on the basis of competence, experience and administrative requirements.

Her marriage to a politically exposed person does not, in itself, establish that she lacks the integrity or professional capacity to perform her duties. Neither should a public servant be automatically disqualified from career progression because of a spouse’s political affiliation.

By the available administrative considerations, therefore, INEC may be within its rights to deploy her to the position.

But legality and prudence are not always the same thing. The Directorate of Electoral Operations is arguably the nerve centre of election management, coordinating activities that run from planning and logistics to the actual conduct of elections. Its leadership must command unquestionable confidence across the political divide.

In a country where electoral institutions have repeatedly come under suspicion, the appointment of someone with a close family connection to the campaign of an incumbent President inevitably creates an avoidable perception problem.

This is not an indictment of Adeyemi-Showunmi’s integrity. It is an acknowledgement of the peculiar political environment in which she is expected to operate.

In more mature democracies, institutional safeguards, transparent procedures and a demonstrable culture of impartiality can insulate public officials from suspicions arising from personal relationships.

Nigeria, unfortunately, has yet to establish that level of institutional confidence. INEC must consequently exercise exceptional caution. A temporary redeployment of the officer to another department until the 2027 elections are concluded may be worth considering, not as a punishment or admission of wrongdoing, but as a precaution to protect public confidence in the commission.

The stakes are particularly high because INEC is struggling to overcome a deep-seated credibility deficit.

The 2023 general elections offered another painful demonstration of the gap between electoral promises and performance. The commission had assured Nigerians that technology, particularly the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System and the INEC Result Viewing Portal, would strengthen transparency and enable citizens to independently verify polling-unit results.

However, its failure to upload results as expected generated widespread distrust and controversy. The ensuing legal battles further damaged confidence in the electoral process.

Indeed, Nigeria’s electoral history is littered with disputed results, judicial reversals and allegations of manipulation.

On several occasions, courts have overturned results declared by INEC, while in some cases they have effectively determined who won elections after the commission’s declarations were challenged.

Such judicial interventions are necessary safeguards, but they cannot become substitutes for an electoral umpire that should get its job right in the first place.

• Ex-gov hails massive turnout at Atiku’s Sokoto campaign
• FG blames gas shortage as power outages hit five states
• APC’s rain of SUV gifts

The problem is hardly new. The European Union Election Observation Mission described the 2007 presidential election as massively flawed.

The late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, who was declared the winner, himself acknowledged that the election fell short of acceptable standards and promised electoral reform.

Yet, nearly two decades later, the country continues to grapple with the same fundamental problems of transparency, credibility and public trust.

Even the introduction of successive technologies since 2011 has not produced the expected transformation.

Technology can improve accreditation, transmission and collation, but it cannot compensate for compromised officials, weak enforcement or a lack of institutional independence.

Some INEC officials have themselves been convicted of electoral offences, exposing the vulnerability of the system from within.

In 2025, Ignatius Uduk, a professor and the returning officer in the 2019 Akwa Ibom elections, was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for publishing false results and perjury.

Another professor and returning officer, Peter Ogban, was also sentenced to three years for electoral fraud and result manipulation.

In a separate case, two INEC officials were sentenced to a combined 42 years in prison by a Federal High Court in Yola for receiving N362 million from former Petroleum Minister Diezani Alison-Madueke to manipulate the 2015 elections.

These convictions demonstrate that electoral malpractice is not merely a product of political pressure from outside; it can also involve officials entrusted with protecting the integrity of the process.

Perhaps the most alarming consequence is the steady retreat of voters from the ballot box.

Turnout has declined from 57.54 per cent in 2007 to 53.68 per cent in 2011, 43.65 per cent in 2015, 34.75 per cent in 2019 and a dismal 26.72 per cent in 2023.

The figures reflect a disturbing loss of faith in the ability of elections to translate citizens’ choices into political power. A democracy in which barely one in four registered voters participates in a general election cannot afford further institutional failures.

The situation is even more troubling at state and local government levels, where ruling parties frequently deploy the machinery of government to dominate council elections.

In many states, local government polls have become exercises in political coronation rather than genuine contests for popular support. This culture reinforces the perception that elections are largely predetermined and that voting is an exercise in futility.

The 2027 general elections must not become another experiment in electoral credibility.

Twenty-seven years into the Fourth Republic, Nigeria should be consolidating democratic institutions, not repeatedly testing how much public distrust they can withstand. The country can certainly conduct credible elections without Adeyemi-Showunmi serving as Director of Electoral Operations. It cannot afford another election that deepens voter apathy and further undermines confidence in democratic competition.

Ultimately, INEC must recognise that neutrality has two inseparable dimensions: being impartial and being seen to be impartial. It is not enough for the commission to insist that its appointments and decisions comply with administrative rules. It must also demonstrate sensitivity to the legitimate concerns of the electorate and political stakeholders.

The commission must insulate its operations from political influence, enforce strict internal accountability and ensure that every appointment, decision and operational procedure strengthens rather than weakens public confidence.

The Senate, too, must subject presidential nominees to genuine scrutiny rather than rubber-stamp political choices.

INEC’s responsibility is not to satisfy the ruling party, appease the opposition or defend the reputations of individual officials. It is to guarantee that every eligible Nigerian can vote freely and that every valid vote counts.

The commission must understand that in an atmosphere of deep distrust, credibility is not established by official assurances. It is earned through transparent conduct, demonstrable independence and decisions that leave no reasonable grounds for suspicion.