Opinion

Tinubu’s INEC pick…

Published

9 months ago

October 21, 2025

Chigozin Obinna

Bola BOLAWOLE

Joash Amupitan nominated INEC chairman by President Tinubu, becoming the first Kogi native in the role and hailed for integrity and apolitical standing

“You don win! You don win! You don win!”

Also read: Esio Uquong Udoh urges voter registration drive

“What is the meaning of that? What did I win? Me that I don’t play lottery or Bet Niger or Baba Ijebu!”

“What you won is more than all those combined! Whoever has INEC has everything in the Nigeria of our dispensation”

“I still don’t understand the reason for this hysteria of yours”

“Why wouldn’t you? Were you not the one who commanded President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to choose the next INEC chairman from Yoruba land? And has he not obeyed you?“

“Oh, I see! I did not command; I only said the obvious. A Yoruba person has never been the INEC chairman. Why? What crime did the Yoruba commit to be so marginalized?“

“We are still saying the same thing. What if Mr. President had ignored your so-called sound argument to do the contrary? Would you have arrested him?”

“Not really; but he would have lost an opportunity to redress a long-standing injustice against his own people. No one can grudge him for nominating a Yoruba person as the next INEC chairman if the nomination sails through…”

“Forget about sailing through! It has sailed through already…”

“Don’t let us always talk like that! The president only nominates. It is the duty of the Senate to confirm or reject…”

“But has that ever happened?”

“That it has never happened does not mean it can never happen. There is always a first time, as they say. But whose fault is it if the senators choose to do their job one way or the other? Once the president nominates, the ball rolls to the court of the Senate. They are free to play it as they like”

“I beg to disagree! They must play it according to the rules. They are to screen – and screen they must!”

“I agree with you in that. Had they screened properly, we would have been saved the series of embarrassments that have hallmarked this Fourth Republic, beginning with Salisu Buhari, the first Speaker of the House of Representatives; then Kemi Adeosun and now the Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology, who was forced to resign last week”

“I like the innovation of the disgraced Minister of Innovation. You cannot be made the minister of innovation and be unable to innovate!”

“What do you mean?“

“Is it not an innovation that the erstwhile minister served his mandatory NYSC before graduating from the university?“

“I see! It turned out he never graduated and he never served…”

“You see what I mean? That is double innovation! He never graduated; he never served; yet he scaled through screening at the presidency, then with the security agencies and, finally, at the Senate…”

“We must salute the media that found him out…”

“Some people who had his records must have squealed on him. He must have stepped on toes…”

“That is true! There is no criminal that is not known by one person or another. There must be many of his type still hiding in various sectors of our national life…”

“Let’s leave that alone and let’s return to INEC. Controversy continues to trail Tinubu’s choice. They said he was a card-carrying APC member…”

“In fact, they said he was a member of the legal team that defended Tinubu’s 2023 election victory at the tribunal, but …”

”I was alarmed when I first heard that! Could they have been so stupid, both to nominate and to accept, until I saw that it was a case of mistaken identity”

“Mistaken what?“

“Mistaken identity! Osipitan is different from Amupitan. Otherwise, Obi and Atiku would have since hit the roof with their head”

“Yoruba people sef! They specialize in twisting words and tongues! Osi-pitan! Amu-pitan! Pitan, Pitan all over the place! What is the difference between the names?“

“Honestly, I don’t know! But ‘to Pitan’ means to tell a story. Maybe the names tell a story. Or the circumstances of birth or the time of birth…”

“I think ‘osi’ in Yoruba means poverty…”

“Yes, but the pronunciation of this particular ‘osi’ in Pitan is not the same as you pronounce poverty. It is pronounced differently…”

“I see! A name that tells stories signifies that the man’s tenure will tell stories…”

”That is, if it is not already doing so! One BAT nominates another BAT for a position as important as that of the INEC chairman“

“What do you mean? Who is BAT 1? And who is the other BAT?”

“Don’t you know that the initials of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu translates into BAT?”

“I see! But Amupitan’s do not! He is Joash Ojo Amupitan aka JOA”

“He is a BAT in another dimension. He comes from a section of the country which is neither South nor North. Or better still, which is both North and South, depending”

“I don’t understand”

“Amupitan is a Yoruba name. The man himself, ethnically-speaking, is Yoruba but his geo-political zone, North-Central, is part of the North”

”I see! He is at once a southerner as well as a northerner! That is double blessing…”

”Under Tinubu, it has apparently been double blessing for the Yoruba elements in the north-central zone. A case in point is Ojulari, the NNPC boss; now Amupitan, but it has not always been so”

“How do you mean?“

“In times past, the North merely used them to make up the numbers but marginalizes them when it comes to sharing the largesse that flows therefrom”

“Quite unfortunate! When they are needed; they are embraced and given the fake impression that they belong to the North, but after they have been used, they are dumped! Is that not what you are trying to say? “

“Exactly! Now that Tinubu is trying to redress this age-long injustice, some people are running their mouths”

’That is to be expected! Politics can be read into anything! But do you think the man will live up to expectations?”

“Whose expectations is the question! ”

“The people’s, of course!”

“Is it the people that nominated him? Or is it the people that will confirm his nomination? Abeg, leave the people out of it jare!”

“As INEC chairman, he is expected to conduct free and fair elections. He must ensure that elections conducted under his watch are credible…”

“Are you aware that INEC chairman alone cannot guarantee credible elections? Where do you place the politicians, the security agencies, and the voters themselves? What of INEC’s permanent and ad-hoc staff? And where do you place the government in power?’

“That is true! This is a classical case of what the economists call ceteris paribus, meaning all other things being equal, but can all other things ever be equal? “

“That is the issue, but I am surprised that Tinubu chose the person he nominated. I thought he would push it in our nose and nominate his son, Seyi, or the audacious Iyaloja, as the next INEC chairman!”

“God forbid!”

“God forbid wetin? If he did, will the heaven fall? The man is audacious enough to do anything! After the removal of fuel subsidy and forex exchange equalization, all in one fell swoop, I don’t think there is anything this man cannot do again”

“That’s true! Have you heard the news? Another PDP governor has defected to APC…”

“Stale news! We knew all along that Enugu would fall. The next is Bayelsa…”

“But I smell a rat! Can it be that the opposition people are emptying themselves into the ruling party so they can fight it from within and capture power through the back door?”

“Something like what Mikhail Gorbachev did in the USSR? He waltzed his way to the top echelon of the Communist party and thereafter unleashed his glasnost and perestroika bombshells that scattered the communist behemoth“

“My fear is: Will it be easy for the PDP to pull such sucker punch against Tinubu here? The man is a master strategist…”

“But when someone gets too wise and crafty, he may get ensnared in the process. Witness how IBB aka Maradona dribbled himself into a corner. He stepped aside never to step in again…”

“Between me and you, I never expected Tinubu to nominate a man as clean as Amupitan is said to be as INEC chairman. Has he learnt anything from the mistakes of Jonathan or is he repeating them?”

“You think Amupitan can jaga-jaga him as was done to Jonathan?“

“I have my fears! The Yoruba people are too finicky about integrity and doing the right thing…”

“Then, where do we place the whole argument? The Yoruba deserve the post; yet…”

“Just take note that it is one of the wonders of our world that a sitting president can open his eyes and nominate a man many are saying has integrity. IBB made the same mistake with Humphrey Nwosu…”

“Maybe Tinubu is sure of his onions! With the opposition parties in disarray and the politicians that matter emptying themselves into APC, what else is there for Tinubu to fear?”

“Politics is not that straightforward. By the way, we intimated our readers two weeks ago about the mathematical wonder of 2520…”

“Yes, that is true. The number looks like any other number but there is something strange about it. It is divisible by any number from 1 to 10…”

“How does that correlate with happenings in the polity?“

Also read: Esio Uquong Udoh urges voter registration drive

“Simple: Not everything that appears normal on the surface is actually or in the final analysis normal”

“That is deep!”

Up Next

From Ejigbo to the National Stage: The Humble Rise of a Reluctant Politician

Don't Miss

MEXC powers Africa’s crypto inclusion via stablecoin adoption

Chigozin Obinna

Click to comment

Opinion

Seven prime ministers in a decade: What Nigeria can learn from Britain’s chaos

Published

1 week ago

July 2, 2026

Mariam Balogun

By Dr Toju Ogbe,

The resignation of British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, less than two years after leading the Labour Party to a landslide electoral victory, was dramatic, yet reflected a pattern we have become familiar with in recent British politics.

Also read: Abolish state of origin: A prerequisite for true national integration

Starmer now joins a procession of fallen prime ministers stretching back to 2016 – from David Cameron to Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss, and Rishi Sunak.

None of these prime ministers was ousted through military intervention, popular insurrection, or a court order. Rather, each was ultimately brought down by the same political system that elevated them to electoral glory.

To the casual observer, the rapid turnover of British Prime Ministers in the last decade may appear chaotic, or even a symptom of political instability. Some argue that the British electorate has become ungovernable.

However, beneath the apparent chaos at Westminster lies an uncomfortable truth that African democracies would do well to examine, particularly Nigerians who wonder why our democracy has delivered so little despite almost three decades of uninterrupted civilian rule.

The turbulence of British politics over the last decade, presents an important lesson on democratic accountability beyond successful elections.

Once the prime minister is deemed a liability by their own political party, the mechanics of accountability are activated. The daggers are quietly drawn and the ruthless pressure to resign begins.

Every poll and survey on public opinion is closely monitored, local election results are taken as a referendum on leadership. Cabinet resignations begin to gain momentum and backbenchers get restless.

Once the news media smells an internal uprising, they amplify scrutiny of the prime minister, subjecting every move – speech, public appearance, political misstep etc to relentless examination.

Pressure gradually mounts until the prospect of bitter internal leadership challenge becomes impossible to resist. The Prime Minister falls.

For every British Prime Minister, winning an election is merely the beginning of examination, not the end. Political survival lasts only for as long as the prime minister maintains the confidence of his party and the parliament.

This is the muscle of British democratic accountability; a political culture that prioritises institutional survival over individual ambition. Starmer recognised this reality in his resignation speech:

“The question my party is asking now is whether I am best placed to lead us into the next general election. I have heard the answer of my parliamentary party to that question, and I accept that answer with good grace.”

That closing sentence alone is a masterclass in British institutional democracy. The party spoke. The leader listened. The correction comes from within.

Nigeria presents a strikingly different political logic.

Nigeria on the other hand, presents an interesting contrast with a different political logic and culture.

The notion that a governing party would overtly interrogate the performance of its own leader and engineer a transition to someone better equipped to maintain public confidence, is in most cases politically unthinkable in Nigeria.

Political parties in Nigeria do not coalesce around ideological principles; rather, they operate more as electoral instruments organised around powerful individuals.

Internal dissent is often dealt with as betrayals rather than as part of healthy democratic engagement. Godfatherism and transactional loyalties shape political succession and leadership retention.

Once elected in Nigeria, there is an inherent assumption that a governor or president has a fixed two-term lease on power.

While 10 Downing Street is preparing to welcome its seventh Prime Minister in a decade, Nigeria, in contrast, has had only two democratically elected presidents during the same period – one of whom is still serving.

Social and economic conditions may deteriorate. Insecurity may worsen. Campaign promises may be ignored.

Public frustrations may become unbearable. Yet, incumbent governors and presidents often remain insulated from meaningful internal scrutiny and are even routinely anointed as ‘consensus’ candidate for second terms provided loyalties to godfathers, rather than the electorates are maintained.

The consequence is that loyalty, instead of performance is often rewarded at the expense of accountability.

This is not an argument for a revolving door at Aso Rock, as frequent leadership changes, by themselves, do not guarantee good governance.

Rather it is a case for making accountability an integral aspect of party politics in Nigeria.

Although the Nigerian presidential system provides for a fixed four-year term regardless of party confidence, political parties should however, be more than instruments for election campaigns, activated to simply retain or take over power every four years.

Electoral victory, should not be the ultimate goal, but the starting point of public service where democratic legitimacy must be continuously earned.

Equally important, political parties must develop the institutional maturity to honestly evaluate their own leaders. They must prioritise public interest and institutional credibility over loyalty to ‘Godfathers’.

The ultimate lesson from Westminster’s revolving door is clear: the true strength of a democratic system, lies not in the ability to produce leaders, but the capacity to effectively replace them, when they no longer command confidence.

Protecting failing leaders from accountability weakens democracy and political parties must ensure that no leader is more powerful than the institution.

Also read: Madugu Targets Strong WAFCON Title Defence for Super Falcons

As political parties gear up for the 2027 general elections, the political class must decide what matters more: we can continue to reward blind loyalty and endure predictable decline, or discover the courage to demand accountability from those who seek to lead us.