The Independent National Electoral Commission has launched a sharp pushback against viral claims linking its Chairman, Prof Joash Amupitan, to alleged partisan activity on X, saying the story is false, malicious and part of a wider effort to weaken confidence in the electoral umpire.
INEC said the chairman does not operate a personal X account and has never used any social media platform to promote a political cause, describing the allegation as “entirely baseless” and “a total fabrication”.
In its defence, the commission went beyond a routine denial. It said cybercriminals had previously opened fake accounts in Amupitan’s name to deceive unsuspecting Nigerians, and that several of those impersonation attempts had already been reported to security agencies.
INEC also said it was now working with security and cyber-intelligence units to trace the people or groups behind the latest wave of digital deception, insisting it would not allow the character of its leadership to be attacked by “digital imposters and mischief-makers”.
The timing is politically sensitive. The allegations surfaced against the backdrop of growing scrutiny of INEC’s leadership and its handling of Nigeria’s electoral future, with the African Democratic Congress only days earlier demanding Amupitan’s resignation over what it described as a collapse of confidence in the commission.
The party’s criticism has sharpened the perception that the electoral body is being dragged into a widening credibility war, where every online claim, however flimsy, is being weaponised as evidence of bias.
That is precisely why the legal angle matters. Nigeria’s Cybercrimes Act treats identity theft and impersonation as offences, including the fraudulent use of another person’s electronic signature, password or unique identifying features, as well as false statements made about one’s identity for gain or to cause harm.
The law also covers impersonation of another person, living or dead, where the intent is to obtain an advantage, secure property, inflict disadvantage or obstruct justice.
INEC’s warning that perpetrators will face prosecution is therefore not merely rhetorical; it is anchored in statute.
What makes this episode especially dangerous is not just the claim itself, but the method. Social media impersonation has become one of the cheapest tools in modern political sabotage: create a convincing fake profile, attach it to a real public official, circulate a politically charged post, then allow outrage to do the rest.
In a country where electoral trust is already fragile, such tactics can spread faster than formal rebuttals and leave a permanent stain even after the falsehood is exposed.
INEC’s insistence that it releases authentic updates only through verified channels is, in effect, an attempt to shut down that viral pipeline before it damages the commission further.
The broader message from this confrontation is clear. Nigeria’s electoral battles are no longer fought only at polling units, tribunal chambers or party headquarters.
They are also fought on timelines, through fabricated screenshots, impersonation accounts and digitally manufactured outrage.
INEC is now trying to frame the Amupitan claim as both a criminal act and a political operation, and that framing may matter as much as the investigation itself, because the commission knows that public confidence is often harder to rebuild than a hacked account is to create.
For now, the commission is telling Nigerians to treat every unofficial post with caution and to rely only on verified communication platforms for official information.
Behind that simple warning lies a much bigger contest over legitimacy, digital trust and the battle to keep Nigeria’s electoral system from being poisoned by online forgery before the next major political season begins.
Follow us on our broadcast channels today!
- WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VawZ8TbDDmFT1a1Syg46
- Telegram: https://t.me/atlanticpostchannel
- Facebook: https://www.messenger.com/channel/atlanticpostng
