Reputation is INEC’s greatest test, not logistics- Lecky, ex-commissioner
Former National Commissioner of the Independent National Electoral Commission, Dr Mustapha Lecky, has urged the newly nominated INEC Chairman, Prof Joash Amupitan (SAN), to protect his integrity and take firm charge of the election management process. Speaking on Channels Television’s Politics Today following his nomination, Lecky said Amupitan has what it takes to restore the Commission’s image. David Lawani monitored the interview
Having served on the board of INEC and worked with Prof Jega and Prof Yakubu, you understand what it means to administer elections in Nigeria. How much of a burden is the new INEC Chairman going to be carrying into that office?
Well, for one thing, it is good that the government of His Excellency, President Bola Tinubu, acted promptly to nominate a replacement for Prof Mahmood Yakubu. That has not always been the case, as it sometimes takes a while before such appointments are made. As Yakubu is leaving, Amupitan is coming in. I must confess, I do not know anything about this professor; I am hearing about him for the first time. Both the name and pedigree are entirely unknown to me. That said, there is indeed a lot of burden he will inherit. These are legacy burdens that have existed over time and which successive administrations have not been able to address fully. It remains a work in progress. The electoral system in Nigeria is complex, with historical challenges that each new leadership must confront. He will have to deal with both institutional and perception-related problems that are deep-rooted within the system.
What do you make of the reputation of the Commission right now?
There is no question that the Commission has suffered significant reputational damage from the last general election, particularly because of how the collation and declaration of results were handled. It was a self-inflicted injury, one that could have been avoided but lingered because it was not promptly addressed by the outgoing administration or by the Chairman himself. That damage to reputation is real, and reputation is very critical in any electoral process. It determines whether people accept or reject an election outcome. When confidence is lost, it can trigger a series of unpleasant consequences. People often react emotionally and may take the law into their own hands, resulting in violence or instability. Now, the election itself was not entirely bad, but the process and management leading to the outcome left much to be desired. INEC may have learned lessons from it, but the new Chairman will inherit that burden. To me, reputation is the number one priority for INEC. For any electoral body to be believable, it must maintain a high level of integrity and public confidence. A good reputation also helps reduce litigation because people’s perception of fairness affects how they react to results. Clearly, restoring credibility is a major issue that must be urgently addressed. Nigerians must believe in the electoral process again. We will have to watch the body language, reforms, and immediate actions of the new Chairman to see how he tackles these challenges.
Do you see any banana peel in the form of decisions that could trip the new Chairman in the coming days?
I don’t see any banana peel that would make him slip. That’s unlikely because Nigeria has a resilient and reasonably robust democratic structure behind INEC as an institution. The bureaucracy is strong, and the directors are experienced. Over the years, many of them have been trained and exposed to international best practices in election management. When we served under past chairmen, we ensured that the bureaucracy was strengthened. People were trained and exposed to global standards in electoral processes. That institutional memory remains intact. Many directors are competent, well-trained, and deeply committed. Although a few commissioners might be leaving soon, the new Chairman will quickly orient them. When we assumed office, some people exited, but we hit the ground running and conducted several elections within two months. So, if the bureaucracy sustains that level of professionalism, I do not foresee any banana peel waiting for the incoming Professor. He will find a resilient, well-grounded team ready to support him. The Acting Chairman, Mrs May Agbamuche-Mbu, is an intelligent, composed, and meticulous person. I am confident she will handle the transition properly and orient the new Chairman effectively.
The tenure of about five commissioners will end in early 2026, and another five in 2027. How can Prof Amupitan address these challenges of election malpractice? And how much concern does it give you that when one staff member commits an infraction, fingers are pointed at the INEC Chairman?
The outgoing Chairman deserves some credit for introducing discipline into the system. Under his leadership, several staff and returning officers involved in electoral malpractices were sanctioned, some dismissed, and even jailed. That had never happened before. He should take credit for that. I don’t believe there is a “cabal” within INEC waiting to manipulate elections or undermine the Commission. If such things occur, they are isolated cases, and we have institutions like the EFCC and the Police to handle infractions, primarily financial and ethical ones. These institutions are improving in efficiency and integrity. The new Chairman must adopt a policy of zero tolerance for electoral infractions, whether by political parties, INEC staff, or temporary election officials such as collation and returning officers. These categories of officers have been the weakest links in our electoral process. They have often compromised results and brought embarrassment to INEC. I have had my issues with returning and collation officers; they are the ones primarily responsible for the negative image that INEC sometimes suffers. The unnecessary drama during collation and declaration is avoidable, and the new Chairman must pay special attention to it. He needs a new strategy for managing collation and result declaration; these are critical points that determine public confidence in elections. If he can take direct control over that process, insist on transparency, and build accountability, he will go a long way toward succeeding as Chairman.
Do you think the new Chairman will have any problems during the Senate screening process?
As I said earlier, I don’t know him personally, so one cannot say for sure. However, from what I’ve read since his nomination, which was announced at the National Economic Council meeting, he appears to be a respectable and credible man. Nigerians are becoming increasingly vigilant about integrity and background checks, which is a good thing. From my assessment, he seems like someone with a good record. Those of us still active in civil society would be happy to work with such a person. So, I don’t foresee any problems. I believe his screening process will be smooth. The President acted promptly, and that’s commendable. I see a smooth sail for him, and I sincerely wish him all the best.
As a man of wisdom, not only from age but also from experience within INEC, what advice would you give him as he assumes office?
My advice is simple but crucial: he must take effective control of the election result management process. That is the heart of INEC’s credibility. He must be personally involved in the nomination and selection of returning and collation officers. He should not delegate this entirely to universities or vice-chancellors who may act based on their whims or external pressures. We’ve had bad experiences in the past where some of these officers compromised the process. I’ve written and spoken extensively about this issue, even presenting papers on it. He needs to assert control over this critical area. Once he does that and ensures transparency and accountability in result management, he will succeed. That’s the defining test of leadership in INEC.
