By Lemmy Ughegbe, Ph.D
In an era where a screenshot can travel faster than truth, and a fabricated post can shape public opinion before facts can catch up, institutions are increasingly being forced into unfamiliar territory: digital self-defence.
The recent controversy surrounding an alleged X post attributed to the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is one such moment. But beneath the noise lies a crucial detail that must shape any honest analysis: the tweet in question was not alleged to have been made in his current role as INEC Chairman. It was said to have been posted some four years ago, when he was still a lecturer.
That single detail changes the entire complexion of the debate.
Because this is no longer just about whether a tweet exists, it is about whether a historical digital footprint is being resurrected, reconstructed, or outright manufactured for present-day political effect.
And that is a far more serious matter.
To its credit, INEC did not dismiss the claim casually. Instead, it issued a detailed public statement, invoking forensic analysis, timestamp discrepancies, archive searches, and cross-platform verification to argue that the alleged account and its posts were fabricated.
At the heart of its defence lies a powerful claim: that the viral reply attributed to the Chairman was posted thirteen minutes before the original tweet it supposedly responded to. If true, that is not merely suspicious. It is structurally impossible within the logic of digital platforms.
In a sea of assertions, that point stands out as the closest thing to a smoking gun.
Yet this is precisely where the document’s strength also reveals its limitations.
INEC tells the public what its forensic investigation found, but stops short of showing the full work. The independent cybersecurity expert it references remains unnamed. The underlying forensic report is not attached.
In essence, the Commission asks Nigerians to trust its conclusions without fully exposing the process that produced them.
That approach may satisfy those already inclined to believe the institution. It will not persuade sceptics.
This is where the document begins to falter.
A careful reading shows that while some claims are strongly grounded, others blur the line between evidence and interpretation.
This tendency to move too quickly from observation to certainty weakens what could otherwise have been a more disciplined and persuasive argument.
More concerning, however, is the tone of the statement. At several points, it adopts language more suited to a courtroom than to a public institution.
When an institution invokes such language, it is no longer merely informing the public. It is, in effect, pronouncing judgment.
INEC is not a court of law. It is an electoral management body.
But in matters of public trust, being right is not enough. One must also be seen to be right, through processes that are transparent, verifiable, and open to independent scrutiny.
There is also a broader institutional question that this episode raises. How should public bodies respond to digital misinformation?
Globally, institutions are still grappling with this challenge.
INEC’s approach, by contrast, attempts to do both defence and adjudication at once.
Transparency, in this context, is not just about openness. It is about strategy.
The document does get one thing absolutely right. It warns Nigerians about how easily digital content can be fabricated.
Because beyond INEC lies a larger crisis of information integrity.
This is why the burden on institutions is heavier than ever.
On balance, INEC’s statement is a serious attempt at narrative control, but a less convincing exercise in evidentiary transparency.
And perhaps that is the lesson.
In the digital age, truth is no longer established by assertion. It is established by evidence that can be tested.
Anything less leaves room for doubt.
And when doubt lingers, narratives, whether true or false, find space to thrive.
Lemmy Ughegbe, Ph.D writes from Abuja
Email: lemmyughegbeofficial@gmail.com
WhatsApp ONLY: +2348069716645
