As the tenure of the current INEC Chairman draws to an end, the calls for electoral reform are growing louder across the country. The role of a referee in a football match is exactly what the role of an INEC Chairman is to elections. Imagine if the defending champions of the UEFA Champions League were allowed to nominate the referee for their own match, trust would vanish, no matter how neutral that referee tried to be. This is the same problem opposition parties face with INEC: the process that brings the “referee” to the field already raises doubts.
In Nigeria, every election season echoes the same cry: INEC cannot be trusted. Why? Because the appointment of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Chairman is dominated by the ruling party. The President nominates, the Senate, often controlled by the same party, confirms, and the opposition is left doubting the impartiality of the electoral umpire. The result? Suspicion, tension, and bitter disputes after nearly every poll.
Yet democracy stands or falls on trust. If the referee is seen as biased, the match itself is discredited. That is why Nigeria must urgently rethink how the INEC Chairman is appointed.
When the power to appoint rests almost entirely with the executive, the opposition naturally assumes the umpire is tilted against them. Even if the appointee acts fairly, the perception of bias is already cemented. In democracy, perception matters just as much as reality.
The Way Forward
Create a committee with seats for the judiciary, civil society, academics, and professional bodies like the Nigerian Bar Association. This group would screen and shortlist credible candidates.
The President may still appoint, but only from the shortlist prepared by the committee. This preserves constitutional balance while limiting partisanship.
Raise the bar confirmation should require a two-thirds majority of the Senate. This forces consensus and ensures opposition lawmakers play a real role.
The INEC Chairman should serve a single, non-renewable 7-year term, insulated from political bargaining over reappointment. Funding for INEC must also be independent, charged directly to the national treasury.
The Chairman should only be removed by a two-thirds vote of the National Assembly, and only for proven misconduct, incapacity, or criminal conviction.
Reforming the way the INEC Chairman is chosen will not only reduce suspicion, it will strengthen democracy, build confidence in leadership, and reassure citizens that their votes truly count. In countries where the electoral umpire is trusted, losers accept results more readily, and winners govern with greater legitimacy.
Nigeria cannot afford endless cycles of disputed elections. We must act now to rebuild trust in the referee of our democracy. A transparent, inclusive, and balanced appointment process for the INEC Chairman is not just good governance, it is national survival.
The choice is clear: continue with business as usual and breed distrust, or reform the system and give Nigerians an electoral umpire that all can trust.
The time for reform is now.
– Ira Habib writes from Kogi state.
