2027: ADC Reps vow to petition NJC over corrupt judges, want INEC Chairman prosecuted over partiality, inconsistencies

By KEMI KASUMU

The Caucus raised concerns regarding the impartiality and neutrality of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Professor Joash Amupitan, to oversee a free, fair, and credible 2027 general elections. This follows recent public statements and actions by the chairman deemed to be compromising, partisan, and conflicted.

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) Caucus in the Nigeria’s House of Representatives reportedly held its inaugural meeting on Sunday, April 12, 2026 to review political developments in the nation and resolved to take some steps at correcting the wrong behaviours of the electoral umpire the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) which are capable of truncating the democracy in the country.

The Federal Lawmakers also decided on what to do with judiciary officers’ corruption and how to help ensure a better space of justice for possibly free, fair and credible process in the 2027 general elections as well as pushing the operators of the system away from their current lawlessness to doing what is right and lawful in ensuring accountable governance in Africa’s most populous country.

The ADC Representatives Caucus meeting resolutions included:

“1. The Caucus raised concerns regarding the impartiality and neutrality of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Professor Joash Amupitan, to oversee a free, fair, and credible 2027 general elections. This follows recent public statements and actions by the chairman deemed to be compromising, partisan, and conflicted.

“2. It has been alleged that he previously made a partisan statement on his personal X account, wherein he expressed support for the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). Additionally, he has been accused of posting content alleging Christian genocide in Nigeria. Although the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has denied that Professor Amupitan is the owner of the X account in question, digital forensic analysis and other online investigations conducted by various sources suggest that the account is indeed his, and the phone number used to create it is registered in his name. This has raised concerns regarding his transparency, integrity, and trustworthiness, particularly given the critical nature of the office he holds, which will have far-reaching implications for the nation.

“3. In light of these inconsistencies and concerns regarding impartiality and integrity, the House Caucus, on Monday, 13th April 2026, hereby calls for the removal of Prof. Amupitan from office and advocates for his prosecution, in order to safeguard the nation against an avoidable descent into undemocratic practices.

“4. The Caucus is gravely concerned about the ostensibly undemocratic actions taken by INEC, under the leadership of Prof. Amupitan, which appears to deny the ADC the opportunity to participate in the forthcoming elections. This is being achieved through the perpetuation of a leadership crisis within the party, whereby INEC has abdicated its responsibility as an impartial arbiter and instead intervened in the party’s internal affairs. Specifically, the commission seems to be recognizing an illegitimate leadership faction, contrary to the authentic leadership of Senator David Mark, which had previously been acknowledged and certified by INEC itself, having met the requisite criteria, as evidenced by a recent affidavit issued by the Commission.

“5. We note that the Commission, in collusion with certain elements within the judiciary, is actively working to undermine the aspirations of the ADC, thereby preventing the party from fielding candidates in the forthcoming elections, through duplicitous means that serve to obstruct inclusivity within the democratic process.

“6. In fact, credible information at our disposal suggest that certain individuals within the judiciary and INEC are collaborating to influence the outcome of a case coming up on Tuesday, April 14, 2026 regarding the leadership question in the ADC, potentially impacting the recognition of a discredited faction.

“7. In fact, Section 83 (5) in the Electoral Act 2026 clearly prohibits any court of law in Nigeria from entertaining any case concerning party Congresses. The section says –

“S. 83 (5) “… No Court in Nigeria shall entertain jurisdiction over any suit or matter pertaining to the internal affairs of a political party.”

“S. 83 (6) further provides as follows:

“Where such action is brought in negation of this provision –

“(a) No interim or interlocutory injunction shall be entertained by the Court, but the Court shall suspend its ruling and deliver it at the stage of final judgment and shall give accelerated hearing to the matter.

“(b) The Court shall, at the conclusion of the matter, impose costs of not less than ₦10,000,000.00 on the counsel who filed the action and not less than ₦10,000,000.00 on the Plaintiff/Applicant and in addition to payment to the Commission of any cost, including solicitors’ fees incurred by it where joined as a party.”

“8. Sadly, that’s what INEC is enabling by its actions and pronouncements concerning the internal affairs of the ADC.

“9. But we are vigilant and have concluded plans, on behalf of the Nigerian people, to submit a petition before the National Judicial Council, NJC, to the effect that politically exposed judicial officers, as recently outlined by the NBA president, Afam Osigwe, SAN, be made to undergo investigations and possible removal from the Bench.

“10. As the ADC Caucus in the House of Representatives, we are compelled to act in response to the existential threat to our democracy. With critical segments of society, including the Nigerian Bar Association, civil society, media, and citizens, losing faith in the judiciary and electoral authorities, it is imperative that all Nigerians of goodwill transcend partisan divisions and prioritize rescuing our faltering democracy.

“11. It is indeed disheartening to observe that even during the military era, when laws often contained ouster clauses, the judiciary still boasted esteemed jurists such as the late Chukwudifu Oputa, Niki Tobi, and Kayode Eso, Mohammed Uwais, et cetera, who delivered discerning judgments despite the authoritarian regime. We can, therefore, only surmise that these revered legal luminaries would be deeply disturbed in the great beyond by the current trend of questionable judgments, contradictory interim decisions, and overt judicial overreach, which appear to emanate from the very chambers of justice that was once adorned with distinction.

“12. We concur with the position of the NBA president, who only days ago expressed concerns over the growing perception of judges as beneficiaries of political patronage, stating that it erodes public trust in the justice system. The NBA president had lamented the practice of politicians gifting cars to judges, suggesting it compromises their neutrality and demeans the judiciary. “It demeans the judges. It demeans the judiciary,” he said. He emphasized that judicial needs should be addressed through proper budgetary processes, allowing courts to manage their own affairs rather than relying on public display of largesse, which undermine judicial integrity and independence.

“13. INEC must not only be independent in name but also demonstrate impartiality, transparency, credibility, and trustworthiness in its actions. However, current public perception suggests a disconnect from these ideals.”