Several international development partners supporting Nigeria’s electoral process have reportedly urged the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, SAN, to strictly comply with the provisions of the Electoral Act in handling candidate substitutions ahead of the forthcoming general elections.
Sources familiar with the discussions said the partners, who have worked closely with INEC on electoral reforms, capacity building and transparency initiatives, stressed during high-level engagements that the Commission must remain guided by the law and resist all forms of political or external pressure.
INEC development partners include the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), World Bank, European Union (EU), Commonwealth Secretariat, Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), African Union Commission, Electoral Institute for Sustainable Democracy in Africa (EISA), European Centre for Electoral Support (ECES), International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES), International IDEA, Ford Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung, Westminster Foundation for Democracy, International Republican Institute (IRI) and DAI Global, among others.
The organisations provide support in election management, technical assistance, staff training, voter education, election technology, research, post-election reviews and democratic governance programmes.
The warning reportedly followed growing controversy over the alleged attempt by the All Progressives Congress (APC) National Working Committee (NWC) to substitute about 26 National Assembly candidates after the conclusion of INEC-monitored party primaries.
According to the sources, representatives of the development partners emphasised that INEC must protect the integrity of the primary election process and strictly adhere to the electoral timetable.
“INEC must not subvert the clear provisions of the Electoral Act regarding candidate nominations and substitutions. The Commission’s role as an impartial umpire demands that it prioritise legal compliance over any partisan or external influence,” a source quoted the partners as saying.
An official of one of the development partners, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Professor Amupitan had a unique opportunity to strengthen public confidence in Nigeria’s electoral process.
“He must resist any attempt to use internal party appeal committees as a backdoor to rewrite primary outcomes after the stipulated deadlines. The law is clear, and INEC must enforce it without fear or favour—not presidential directives or influential godfathers,” the official said.
The partners reportedly warned that any perception of compromise could undermine the gains recorded in previous elections, trigger widespread litigation and disrupt the electoral timetable.
The caution comes amid the APC’s submission of a revised list of National Assembly candidates to INEC. The party reportedly said the changes, affecting senatorial and House of Representatives candidates in several states, were based on recommendations of its Primary Election Appeal Committee following the resolution of petitions.
However, critics, including legal practitioners and some affected aspirants, contend that the substitutions contravene Section 33 of the Electoral Act, which permits changes to candidates only in cases of death or voluntary withdrawal. They also argue that the process could violate the right to fair hearing guaranteed under Section 36 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).
INEC’s timetable had already provided a specific period for political parties to conduct primaries and resolve disputes arising from them. Stakeholders argue that any action outside that window would be inconsistent with the Commission’s approved schedule.
While commending Professor Amupitan’s previous public commitment to transparency and electoral integrity, the development partners reportedly urged him to demonstrate visible independence in the discharge of his responsibilities.
“Development partners remain committed to supporting INEC in delivering credible elections. However, that support is predicated on the Commission’s unwavering commitment to the rule of law,” another source familiar with the discussions said.
As of the time of filing this report, INEC had not issued an official response to the concerns raised by the development partners and other rights groups.
Political observers say the Commission’s handling of the APC’s reported candidate substitutions—and any similar requests from other political parties—could shape public confidence in the electoral process ahead of the general elections.
Legal experts also predict that aggrieved aspirants may seek judicial intervention if INEC is perceived to have approved changes that are inconsistent with the Electoral Act.
The development has intensified scrutiny of the electoral umpire, with stakeholders calling on INEC to remain impartial and uphold the rule of law throughout the electoral process.
