Amupitan: Changing The Trajectory of Elections in Nigeria

BY TIMOTHY ENIETAN-MATTHEWS 

For decades, Nigerians approached election seasons with a familiar mixture of hope, anxiety and scepticism. The questions were often the same: Would election materials arrive on time? Would results be manipulated during transmission? Would the final outcome reflect the will of the people? Would the electoral umpire be able to withstand pressure from political actors?

These concerns became deeply ingrained in the nation’s democratic culture after years of disputed elections, delayed result collation, logistical failures and allegations of electoral malpractice. Consequently, public confidence in the electoral process suffered repeated setbacks, making electoral credibility one of the most important challenges confronting Nigeria’s democracy.

However, recent electoral exercises conducted under the leadership of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, suggest that a significant shift may be underway.

The conduct of the Ekiti State governorship election, alongside six bye-elections held simultaneously across different parts of the country, has triggered a fresh national conversation about the future of elections in Nigeria. Beyond the outcome of the contests themselves, what attracted widespread attention was the professionalism, transparency, efficiency and speed with which the elections were conducted and concluded.

For many observers, the elections represented another major milestone in what is gradually becoming an electoral revolution under Professor Amupitan’s stewardship.

A New Standard Emerges

One of the most remarkable features of the Ekiti governorship election was the seamless deployment of electoral materials and personnel across the state.

From urban centres to remote communities, reports indicated that polling officials arrived early, accreditation commenced on schedule and voting proceeded with minimal disruptions. The same level of organisation was witnessed in the six bye-elections conducted simultaneously in various states.

In previous election cycles, logistical challenges often became the first source of controversy. Delayed arrival of materials frequently led to voter frustration, extended voting hours and allegations of manipulation. This time, however, the narrative was largely different.

Election observers, civil society groups, political stakeholders and ordinary voters acknowledged the noticeable improvement in operational efficiency.

Yet perhaps the most significant achievement was not merely the conduct of voting itself but what happened afterward.

IReV and the Triumph of Transparency

One of the strongest criticisms of previous elections in Nigeria centred on the gap between polling unit results and final declarations.

The introduction of the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) was designed to address this concern by allowing polling unit results to be uploaded and viewed in near real-time.

Under Professor Amupitan’s leadership, the system appears to be achieving its intended objective.

During the Ekiti election and the bye-elections, polling unit results were uploaded promptly, enabling political parties, election observers, journalists and citizens to independently monitor the process.

The rapid availability of results significantly reduced speculation, rumours and unnecessary tension.

More importantly, it strengthened public confidence because Nigerians could compare uploaded polling unit results with officially declared outcomes.

Transparency, after all, is not merely about being honest; it is about creating systems that allow citizens to verify honesty for themselves.

The efficient deployment of IReV accomplished precisely that.

Speed Without Sacrificing Credibility

Historically, prolonged collation periods have often created fertile ground for suspicion and controversy.

The longer election results remain outstanding, the greater the anxiety and the greater the possibility of misinformation filling the vacuum.

The Ekiti election demonstrated a different approach.

Results were collated efficiently, transmitted promptly and announced within a reasonable timeframe.

The eventual declaration of the winner came without the prolonged uncertainty that has characterized many previous electoral contests.

Significantly, the speed of result declaration did not come at the expense of credibility.

Instead, it complemented transparency.

Because results had already been uploaded and viewed through the IReV system, stakeholders were able to follow the process virtually from polling units through collation centres to the final announcement.

This strengthened confidence in the integrity of the process.

The Verdict of Stakeholders

Perhaps the strongest validation of the election’s success came not from INEC itself but from the reactions of stakeholders.

Political actors, election observers, civil society organisations and many voters acknowledged improvements in the conduct of the polls.

The level of acceptance that followed the elections was noteworthy.

While no electoral process anywhere in the world can claim absolute perfection, the absence of widespread disputes regarding result transmission, collation or declaration represented a major departure from the controversies that have often accompanied elections in Nigeria.

This growing confidence is important because democracy thrives not merely when elections are held, but when citizens trust the process through which leaders emerge.

Trust remains the most valuable currency of any electoral system.

The Persistent Challenge of Vote Buying

However, the generally positive assessment of the elections does not mean all challenges have disappeared.

Indeed, one major concern continued to surface throughout the Ekiti governorship election.

That concern was vote buying.

Reports and allegations of inducement of voters by political actors emerged from several locations.

Yet it is important to place responsibility where it properly belongs.

While INEC is responsible for organising, supervising and regulating elections, the Commission is not a law enforcement agency.

The responsibility for investigating, preventing and prosecuting vote buying falls primarily on security agencies and other relevant institutions empowered by law.

Equally important is the role of political parties and politicians themselves.

No electoral law can eliminate vote buying if political actors continue to see elections as financial transactions rather than democratic contests.

Likewise, citizens must recognise that selling their votes ultimately undermines their own future.

When voters exchange their ballots for immediate financial gain, they weaken accountability and compromise the quality of governance that follows.

The fight against vote buying must therefore become a collective national responsibility.

Democracy Is a Shared Responsibility

One lesson from the recent elections is that the credibility of Nigeria’s electoral system cannot rest solely on INEC.

There is often a tendency to place the entire burden of electoral success or failure on the Commission.

This approach ignores the reality that elections involve multiple stakeholders.

Political parties must conduct themselves responsibly.

Candidates must campaign issue-by-issue rather than rely on inducement and manipulation.

Security agencies must remain professional and impartial.

The media must report accurately and responsibly.

Civil society organisations must continue to monitor the process constructively.

Most importantly, citizens must protect the sanctity of their votes.

Even the most efficient electoral commission cannot guarantee credible elections if other participants fail in their responsibilities.

Democracy succeeds when every stakeholder plays their part.

Sustaining the Amupitan Reforms

The electoral improvements witnessed in Anambra State, and now reinforced in Ekiti and the six bye-elections, suggest that a new culture of electoral administration is gradually taking root.

The challenge now is sustainability.

Electoral reforms are meaningful only when they become institutionalised rather than personality-driven.

Nigerians must therefore support efforts aimed at strengthening transparency, improving technology deployment, enhancing logistics and increasing public confidence in the electoral process.

Political actors, in particular, have a critical responsibility.

Instead of attacking institutions whenever outcomes are unfavourable, they should contribute to strengthening those institutions.

Constructive engagement, rather than constant confrontation, offers a more productive path toward democratic consolidation.

Professor Amupitan’s leadership has demonstrated that elections can be organised efficiently, transparently and credibly within Nigeria’s complex political environment.

The conduct of the Ekiti governorship election and the six bye-elections has provided encouraging evidence that progress is possible.

But preserving and expanding that progress will require cooperation from all stakeholders.

The Road Ahead

Nigeria’s democratic journey remains a work in progress.

No election is perfect. No institution is flawless. No reform is ever complete.

Yet the recent electoral exercises offer reasons for cautious optimism.

They demonstrate that when institutions function properly, when technology is effectively deployed, and when professionalism guides decision-making, public confidence can be rebuilt.

The emerging electoral culture under Professor Amupitan deserves recognition, not because it has solved every problem, but because it has shown that improvement is possible.

The future of Nigeria’s democracy will ultimately depend not only on what INEC does but also on what political parties, candidates, security agencies and citizens choose to do.

The electoral revolution has begun.

Its success, however, will depend on whether Nigerians collectively decide to sustain it.