The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project has urged the National Assembly to launch a comprehensive investigation into allegations surrounding social media posts linked to the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Professor Joash Amupitan SAN as TheNigeriaLawyer raises a fundamental question about INEC’s decision to investigate its own chairman: why should the accused be the one to hire investigators and investigate himself?
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/TheNigerialawyer-WhatsApp-Channel1.jpg")
The development came as former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Professor Chidi Anselm Odinkalu, also weighed in, questioning why an institution with “Independent” in its name is afraid to submit to independent forensic verification.
“I thought there was ‘independent’ in INEC? They never heard about independent forensics? Why are they afraid of living their name?” Odinkalu posted on X.
The growing chorus of voices demanding an external, independent investigation — rather than INEC’s self-directed probe — reflects deepening public concern about whether the electoral commission can credibly clear its own chairman of allegations that strike at the heart of its institutional neutrality.
In a statement posted on its official X handle on Monday, SERAP called on lawmakers to exercise their constitutional oversight powers to conduct what it described as a “credible, impartial, transparent and effective inquiry” into both the allegations against Amupitan and INEC’s official response.
The organisation stressed that the controversy transcends social media disputes and touches on the credibility and perceived neutrality of Nigeria’s electoral umpire at a critical moment ahead of the 2027 elections.
“The credibility of INEC is essential to the integrity and legitimacy of Nigeria’s electoral process, and any allegations that may undermine this credibility must be promptly, thoroughly, transparently and effectively investigated,” SERAP stated.
The rights group cited Sections 88 and 89 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as providing the National Assembly with clear constitutional authority to investigate the conduct of public institutions and officials in order to expose corruption, inefficiency, or abuse of office.
“No public official or institution is above scrutiny, and the National Assembly has a constitutional duty to ensure that allegations of wrongdoing are not ignored or swept under the carpet,” SERAP stated.
SERAP further argued that lawmakers have obligations under international human rights instruments, including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which require states to guarantee accountability, transparency, and fair processes in governance.
The organisation insisted that any investigation must comply with due process and fair hearing principles, and that its findings should be made public to restore confidence in the electoral system.
“Transparency in the outcome of the investigation is essential to ensuring accountability and restoring public confidence in the electoral process,” SERAP stated.
The group warned that failure to address the allegations could deepen public distrust in INEC ahead of future elections, stressing that the independence and impartiality of the commission remain “conditions precedent” for credible polls in Nigeria.
SERAP also insisted that where credible evidence of wrongdoing is established, appropriate legal and institutional actions must follow in line with the law.
TheNigeriaLawyer has raised what it describes as a fundamental question of natural justice and due process that goes to the heart of the controversy: why should INEC the institution whose chairman is accused be the one to hire forensic experts, direct the investigation, and determine the outcome?
The principle is elementary in law: no person should be a judge in his own cause. This principle, known as nemo judex in causa sua, is one of the twin pillars of natural justice alongside the right to fair hearing. It applies not only to judicial proceedings but to any investigative or quasi-judicial process where the outcome affects the rights, reputation, or status of the person being investigated.
When INEC announces that it has engaged forensic experts and security agencies to investigate whether its own chairman operated a partisan social media account, the commission is effectively asking the public to trust that an institution will reach an objective conclusion about allegations against its own head — the person who appointed the investigators, who will receive their report, and whose continued tenure depends on the outcome.
This is the equivalent of a defendant in a criminal trial hiring the judge, selecting the jury, and determining the rules of evidence. No reasonable person would accept the outcome of such a process as credible, regardless of what it concludes.
If INEC is truly committed to transparency and accountability, the investigation should be conducted by an independent body — whether the National Assembly exercising its oversight powers as SERAP has demanded, an independent forensic firm selected without INEC’s involvement, or a judicial inquiry with the power to compel evidence and testimony.
Anything less risks confirming the very perception of bias that the investigation is supposed to address.
Professor Odinkalu’s intervention cut to the core of the credibility gap in INEC’s self-investigation.
“I thought there was ‘independent’ in INEC? They never heard about independent forensics? Why are they afraid of living their name?” Odinkalu stated on X.
The comment highlights the irony of an institution that bears “Independent” in its official name resisting calls for an independent investigation into allegations against its chairman an irony that has not been lost on the Nigerian public.
Odinkalu’s reference to “independent forensics” suggests that what is needed is not merely a technical verification of whether the X account belonged to Amupitan — a question that can be definitively answered through platform records, IP addresses, email verification data, and login histories but an investigation whose independence from INEC is beyond question.
INEC has repeatedly denied that the chairman operates any personal X handle, maintaining that Amupitan has never engaged in partisan political commentary. The commission has described the viral screenshots showing a “Victory is sure” post under an APC figure’s tweet as part of a coordinated misinformation campaign aimed at discrediting the electoral body.
INEC’s ICT Director, Lawrence Bayode, stated that the commission would not base its findings on screenshots or artificial intelligence outputs alone, noting that forensic experts and security agencies had been engaged to verify the authenticity of the content.
“The investigation would rely strictly on verifiable evidence, not social media interpretations or AI-generated analysis,” Bayode stated.
However, the commission has not disclosed who selected the forensic experts, what their terms of reference are, who will receive their report, or how the findings will be made public gaps in transparency that reinforce concerns about the credibility of a self-directed investigation.
The controversy centres on an X account with the handle @joashamupitan (account ID: 1567086242164101120), created on September 6, 2022. An investigation by TheNigeriaLawyer found the account was tied to the email address amupitanj@yahoo.com — the same personal Yahoo email listed on Professor Amupitan’s publicly available Curriculum Vitae from his time at the University of Jos.
When the controversy erupted, the account was rapidly altered: the username changed from @joashamupitan to @Sundayvibe00, the account was locked, and the profile relabelled as a “Parody Account” changes that require access to the account’s login credentials and that occurred at the precise moment the controversy was trending.
INEC’s claim that cybercriminals have been operating fake accounts in the chairman’s name has not been accompanied by evidence that any complaint was filed before the controversy erupted, nor has the commission explained who made the rapid changes to the account that occurred after the screenshots went viral.
The INEC chairman controversy is not merely a social media dispute. It goes to the foundation of electoral credibility in Nigeria.
The chairman of INEC is expected to be strictly non-partisan under the Nigerian Constitution. Public confidence in the neutrality of the electoral umpire is a prerequisite for the acceptance of election results by all parties and by the Nigerian public.
With the presidential election scheduled for January 16, 2027, party primaries opening on April 23, 2026, and the ADC leadership crisis already raising questions about INEC’s handling of opposition party affairs, the Amupitan social media controversy adds another layer of uncertainty to an electoral process that cannot afford further erosion of public trust.
SERAP’s demand for a National Assembly investigation, Odinkalu’s call for independent forensics, and TheNigeriaLawyer’s question about the propriety of self-investigation all point to the same conclusion: this matter is too important to be left to the accused institution to investigate itself.
The question is whether the National Assembly will take up the challenge, or whether INEC’s self-directed probe will be allowed to serve as the final word on allegations that could define public perception of the 2027 elections before a single vote is cast.
The book, titled The Law of Torts in Nigeria: A Functional Approach, authored by Professor Hagler Sunny Okorie Ph.D and Ikeocha, Nathaniel Ngozi Esq, offers law students, practitioners, and academics a comprehensive guide to understanding and applying tort law in Nigerian courts. Interested buyers can place orders via the following contact numbers: 08028636615, 08037667945, 08032253813, or +234 902 196 2209.
______________________________________________________________________
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE FOR LAWYERS: A COMPREHENSIVE GUIDE
Reimagine your practice with the power of AI “...this is the only Nigerian book I know of on the topic.” — Ohio Books Ltd
Authored by Ben Ijeoma Adigwe, Esq., ACIArb (UK), LL.M, Dip. in Artificial Intelligence, Director, Delta State Ministry of Justice, Asaba, Nigeria.
Bonus:
Get a FREE eBook titled “How to Use the AI in Legalpedia and Law Pavilion” with every purchase.
How to Order: 📞 Call, Text, or WhatsApp: 08034917063 | 07055285878 📧 Email: benadigwe1@gmail.com 🌐 Website: www.benadigwe.com
Ebook Version: Access directly online at: https://selar.com/prv626
________________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
