By Toba Owojaiye | Abuja, Nigeria
In a moment that could redefine the soul of Nigeria’s democracy, the House of Representatives is advancing a bold constitutional amendment to strip the President of the power to appoint the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The move, spearheaded by the House Committee on Constitution Review, seeks to transfer the appointment authority to the National Judicial Council (NJC), a reform long championed by democracy advocates, most notably in the Justice Mohammed Uwais electoral reform recommendations of 2007.
If passed, the amendment would curb decades of executive influence over INEC, an institution whose neutrality has repeatedly come under fire, especially during contentious elections.
“We must ensure that the process of appointing those who oversee our democracy is itself democratic,” said Rep. Idris Wase, a member of the committee. “What’s at stake is not politics, but the integrity of the republic.”
Civil society organizations have thrown their weight behind the amendment, presenting a unified “Credibility Threshold” document to lawmakers. They are demanding transparent, merit-based, and publicly vetted appointments, with final confirmation by the Senate.
“This is no longer about INEC alone — it’s about rescuing the soul of Nigerian elections,” declared Samson Itodo, Executive Director of Yiaga Africa. “The President cannot continue to appoint an umpire in a race where he has a candidate.”
Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, of the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), added, “The time for cosmetic reform is over. Nigerians deserve institutions that are neutral, not beholden.”
Under the draft bill:
The NJC will shortlist and recommend candidates for INEC Chair and National Commissioners.
A non-partisan vetting process will allow the public to submit petitions within 14 days of nominations.
The Senate will confirm appointments after public hearings.
Political party affiliation, conflict of interest, and asset disclosure will be part of the qualification assessment.
While reformists have praised the proposal as a democratic watershed, others have sounded a note of caution.
Abdul Mahmud, a constitutional lawyer, questioned whether the NJC itself is sufficiently insulated from partisan elite influence. “We’re shifting power from one branch of elite capture to another. Without accountability, we may be rearranging the same chessboard.”
Similarly, Joe Okei-Odumakin, President of Women Arise, urged lawmakers to go further and embed citizen panels into the process: “Nigerians must own the reform. We’ve seen enough recycled gatekeepers.”
Despite public enthusiasm, the path to ratification is steep. Any amendment to the 1999 Constitution requires:
Passage by two-thirds of the National Assembly, and
Ratification by two-thirds of Nigeria’s 36 state assemblies.
This formidable requirement has sunk previous attempts at electoral reform, including a similar bill during the 9th Assembly.
Still, analysts say the momentum this time feels different.
“With the 2027 elections looming and trust in electoral institutions eroding, lawmakers understand that this is their moment to restore public faith,” said Dr. Eno Edem, a political analyst at the Centre for Democratic Studies.
The move comes against a backdrop of persistent claims of electoral manipulation, declining voter turnout, and widespread disillusionment with state institutions. Critics argue that as long as the President holds sway over the appointment of INEC leadership, the principle of free and fair elections remains compromised.
Yabagi Sani, National Chairman of the Advanced Democratic Party, echoed these sentiments, urging the National Assembly to extend the reform to appointments of the Inspector General of Police and key security chiefs.
Whether this amendment becomes law or not, it signals a decisive shift in Nigeria’s political climate, from executive dominance to democratic redistribution of power.
The House has spoken. The people are watching. Now, it falls on Nigeria’s lawmakers, and 36 state assemblies, to answer history’s call.
“This is not just about amending a law,” one civil rights activist said. “It’s about giving democracy its oxygen back.”