By Mohammed Mubarak Alabi
The call by the Supreme Council for Shari’a in Nigeria for the removal of the National Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Amupitan, has been framed by Muslim religious organisations as a matter of trust and electoral neutrality rather than religious affiliation.
The Shari’a Council, alongside other Islamic bodies including the Muslim Rights Concern (MURIC), the Federation of Muslim Women of Nigeria (FOMWON), and the National Council of Muslim Youth Organisations (NACOMYO), has argued that Prof. Amupitan’s past public positions raise legitimate concerns about his ability to preside impartially over elections involving candidates of different faiths.
According to the groups, appointing an individual perceived to have previously expressed views considered hostile to Islam or Muslims could undermine confidence in the electoral process. They contend that in tightly contested elections—particularly where Muslim and Christian candidates face off—any victory by a Christian candidate, even if legitimate, may be viewed with suspicion by sections of the Muslim community.
While acknowledging that the legal brief attributed to the INEC chairman was written during his time in private legal practice and cannot be faulted on professional grounds, the groups maintain that the sensitivity of his current office demands a higher threshold of perceived neutrality.
As chairman of the nation’s electoral body, Prof. Amupitan is responsible for overseeing elections across a religiously diverse country. Muslim organisations argue that comments they interpret as anti-Muslim cannot simply be dismissed, given the potential implications for public trust in the commission’s decisions.
The groups have therefore urged President Bola Tinubu to consider appointing a replacement in order to allay fears of possible bias and safeguard confidence in the electoral process. They insist that their position is not based primarily on Prof. Amupitan’s Christian faith.
Rather, they maintain that any replacement—Christian or otherwise—should be someone without a record of statements or actions that could be construed as hostile to any religious group. They argue that there are other qualified Christian candidates who could serve without the burden of controversy.
In one of its statements, MURIC suggested that an unreserved apology from the INEC chairman to the Muslim community might help to ease tensions and rebuild trust, particularly regarding concerns about potential bias toward Muslim staff members of the commission and Muslim candidates in future elections.
The organisations have emphasised that their demand is rooted in what they describe as genuine apprehensions about fairness and the integrity of the electoral system, rather than in religious discrimination.
● Mr. Alabi is an Abuja-based journalist and commentator.
