As the two-term tenure of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Prof. Mahmood Yakubu, winds down next month, Davidson Iriekpen writes that the choice of his successor will not only significantly impact the credibility of the 2027 elections, but also shape the integrity of Nigeria’s electoral process
After serving the maximum two terms of 10 years, Professor Mahmood Yakubu’s long reign as the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) will end next month. The crucial questions many are asking are: What would he be remembered for? Did he save our democracy or slowly strangle it under the weight of unfulfilled promises?
In the years he led the commission, Yakubu oversaw two general elections in 2019 and 2023, making him the longest-serving INEC chairman since Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999.
The outgoing INEC chairman, who succeeded Professor Attahiru Jega, was appointed by Muhammadu Buhari in 2015.
Though many saw INEC under Yakubu as a scourge, his departure is, however, drawing attention because the choice of his successor will significantly impact the credibility of the 2027 elections, particularly as President Bola Tinubu is expected to run for re-election. His replacement will be pivotal, as the public perception of INEC’s neutrality is crucial to the legitimacy and integrity of Nigeria’s democracy.
While his poor handling of the 2019 elections was overlooked, the 2023 general election faced a lot of criticism from many Nigerians, including opposition parties. Technical failures of critical election technologies, along with logistical delays, prompted allegations of bias and incompetence. This led to repeated clamour for his removal from office, which was ignored.
By introducing the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the Result Viewing portal (IReV), which promised real-time accreditation and transmission of results, Yakubu raised expectations of credibility. Many Nigerians believed the 2023 general election would finally be different – a digital firewall against rigging and manipulation.
For this reason, they trooped out in hope, only to watch their dream shattered on collation night like a cheap glass. The failure of real-time result uploads became a scar that refused to heal. Trust, the lifeblood of any democracy, was drained away in a matter of hours.
If the general elections were messy, off-season polls under the outgoing INEC boss were a carnival of malpractices. From Anambra to Kogi, Bayelsa, Imo, to Edo states, a dark pattern emerged: Logistics nightmares haunted every cycle like a bad spirit. Vote buying became the currency of power. Collusion between politicians and compromised INEC officials turned the electoral process into a farce.
Last month’s off-season election, supposedly his sent-forth gift, was marred by confusion and violence in about 16 constituencies across 12 states, with security officers arresting officials of the commission and 288 thugs in Ogun, Kano, and Kaduna states, as well as widespread allegations of vote buying.
Though Yakubu promised zero tolerance for malpractices, these irregularities thrived. On many occasions, many accused him of bending under pressure. His insistence on sticking to timelines in 2023, even when logistics and technical readiness were in doubt, backfired.
In Ghana, Dr. Kwadwo Afari-Gyan became a continental symbol of electoral integrity by insisting on transparency and accountability, even under immense political pressure. In South Africa, the Independent Electoral Commission earned global admiration for its role in stabilising democracy after apartheid.
Also, in India, the world’s largest democracy, election commissions deploy cutting-edge technology and ruthless enforcement of electoral laws, ensuring near-zero tolerance for malpractice. In contrast, technology was introduced in Nigeria but allowed to fail at the most critical hour.
In January, the outgoing INEC chair came under attack for hailing Ghana for conducting a credible election that saw an opposition leader, John Mahama, emerge victorious as president when he could not replicate the same at home.
Besides the transparency that characterised the Ghanaian elections, the results were known within 24 hours after the polls, unlike the Nigerian presidential election conducted under his watch that took five days and kept the country and the entire world in serious suspense.
This is why many are wondering, since the next INEC chairman will preside over elections that will define Nigeria’s democratic future, who would the person be?
Under the law, the president nominates the candidate after consulting the Council of State, then forwards the name to the Senate for confirmation. However, because the president chairs the council and usually controls the Senate through his party, there’s significant room for political influence in the process.
It is for this reason that many are calling on President Tinubu to nominate a credible, independent figure and someone with the spine of steel to resist the temptations and terrors of Nigerian politics.
The new umpire must not just be a technocrat; he must be a reformer, an activist for transparency, a relentless enemy of electoral fraud.
They also demand that he borrow a leaf from former presidents who had resisted the temptation of appointing their kinsmen from the regions and supporters of their political parties as INEC chairpersons to avoid raising suspicions about the commission’s neutrality.
For instance, President Olusegun Obasanjo (South-west) appointed Abel Guobadia (South-south) and Maurice Iwu (South-east). President Goodluck Jonathan (South-south) appointed Attahiru Jega (North-west), and President Muhammadu Buhari (North-west) appointed Yakubu (North-east).
Those who spoke to THISDAY in confidence warned that the appointment of a new INEC chair should not follow Tinubu’s current appointments that disproportionately favoured the South-west.
They warned that since he is expected to run for re-election, if the choice of Yakubu’s successor is compromised, not only will it significantly impact the credibility of the 2027 elections, but Nigeria’s democracy will continue to wobble and drift to the precipice.
Besides the appointment of a credible person as INEC chair, there are also the fear of imposing card-carrying members of political parties as national commissioners and states’ Resident Electoral Commissioners (RECs) which is considered as a flagrant violation of Section 14(2a) of the Third Schedule of the 1999 Constitution, as amended that states: “A member of the commission shall be non-partisan and a person of unquestionable integrity.”
In recent times, Nigerians have continued to witness the biases exhibited by these INEC National Commissioners and RECs during elections, thereby tainting the polls and embarrassing the commission and nation.
Democracy is not all about casting ballots; it also includes those who manage the process, their level of credibility, and integrity.
This is why, when considering anyone as Yakubu’s replacement, he or she must not only be a person with proven integrity but also completely neutral to restore trust, hope, and confidence in Nigeria’s electoral process.
Democracy thrives when arbiters remain neutral, courageous, and consistent in the face of political pressure. Nigeria’s democratic future and socio-economic development depend on bold and unbiased decisions.
