The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has dismissed claims that its Chairman, Prof. Joash Amupitan, SAN, operates partisan social media accounts on X, calling the reports false and malicious. In a statement issued Friday, April 10, 2026, INEC clarified that Amupitan does not own or manage any personal account on X and has never engaged in political commentary. The Commission attributed the misleading posts to cybercriminals who created fake profiles in the Chairman's name to deceive the public and carry out fraud. INEC described the activity as a deliberate attempt to damage the integrity of the Chairman during a crucial phase of electoral reforms and preparations for upcoming elections. The fake accounts, the Commission noted, are part of an ongoing pattern of digital impersonation previously reported to security agencies. INEC confirmed it is collaborating with cyber-intelligence and security authorities to trace the perpetrators. The Commission reiterated that identity theft, deepfake usage, and forged online interactions are criminal offenses under the Cybercrimes Act, and legal action will follow once suspects are identified. Nigerians were advised to disregard any social media content attributed to the Chairman and to rely solely on official INEC communication channels for accurate information. INEC reaffirmed its dedication to ensuring free, fair, and credible elections.
Prof. Joash Amupitan's complete absence from X, despite widespread impersonation, exposes a dangerous gap between public perception and digital reality in Nigeria's electoral space. The fact that multiple fake accounts have circulated in his name—some possibly influencing political discourse—reveals how easily public trust can be weaponized through digital mimicry, especially when real-time verification is lacking.
This incident does not occur in isolation. With INEC deep in electoral reforms and pre-election preparations, the timing of these fraudulent accounts suggests a coordinated effort to destabilize confidence in the electoral process. The Commission's reliance on official channels clashes with the speed and reach of viral misinformation, placing average Nigerians—particularly first-time voters and rural populations with limited media literacy—at high risk of manipulation. The invocation of the Cybercrimes Act is legally sound, but past enforcement has been slow and largely symbolic, raising doubts about real deterrence.
Ordinary citizens, especially those who consume political content primarily through social media, are the most vulnerable. They may not distinguish between a verified government statement and a well-crafted fake profile, leading to misguided political decisions or erosion of faith in electoral institutions. This pattern reflects a broader national trend: Nigeria's institutions remain analog in a digital age, struggling to protect their credibility from agile, anonymous online actors exploiting public trust for fraud and influence.
