A partisan political actor has no clear vision but a biased vision
In a democracy, the legitimacy of elections rests not only on the counting of votes but on the credibility of those who watch the counting. When a photograph emerged Saturday showing an Edo APC state chairman wearing an INEC observer vest at Ekiti's governorship poll, it raised a question older than any single election: who guards the guardians? The incident has drawn constitutional lawyers, opposition coalitions, and ordinary citizens into a deepening conversation about whether Nigeria's electoral commission can be trusted to hold the line between partisan interest and public trust ahead of 2027.
- A single photograph of a ruling party official in an INEC observer vest spread rapidly on social media, transforming a decisive electoral victory into a crisis of institutional credibility.
- The Coalition of Registered Political Parties declared it has lost confidence in INEC's leadership entirely, warning that the commission's independence may already be too compromised to guarantee fair 2027 elections.
- Constitutional lawyers are demanding INEC explain the legal basis for accrediting a state party chairman as a neutral observer, arguing the arrangement is structurally and ethically indefensible.
- The APC is pushing back, insisting political affiliation does not forfeit citizenship rights and that INEC—not the party—bears responsibility for vetting who receives an observer credential.
- Separate allegations of vote-buying, over-voting, and result manipulation in Ekiti and Nasarawa are piling onto the controversy, leaving multiple election outcomes contested and unresolved.
- With APC victories recorded across several states that weekend, the cumulative picture is sharpening public anxiety about whether electoral institutions are referees or participants in Nigeria's political contests.
A photograph circulated Saturday evening that would come to define Ekiti's governorship election—not for its result, but for what it implied about who was watching. In the image, Jarret Tenebe, the APC state chairman in Edo, wore an INEC-issued observer vest, the kind reserved for neutral monitors. By Sunday morning, the picture had ignited accusations that the electoral commission had allowed a partisan operative to pose as an impartial witness.
The election itself produced a clear winner. Incumbent APC governor Biodun Oyebanji secured 319,224 votes, far ahead of the PDP's Wole Oluyede with 40,543 and the ADC's Dare Bejide with 12,872. Oyebanji became the first sitting governor in Ekiti's modern democratic history to win reelection. But the image of Tenebe in that vest had already begun to overshadow the outcome.
The Coalition of Registered Political Parties declared the development disturbing and embarrassing, arguing that a top ruling party official operating as an observer reinforced public suspicion that INEC had been compromised. The coalition declared it had lost confidence in INEC's current leadership to guarantee a level playing field in 2027.
Constitutional lawyer Malachy Ugwommadu articulated the problem plainly: election observers must come from nonpartisan organizations precisely because their role demands independence. A state party chairman carries an inherent political interest in any outcome. He challenged INEC directly—on what grounds had Tenebe been accredited, and what threshold had he met that qualified him to observe elections in a different state?
The APC denied wrongdoing. Party spokesman Uwadiae Igbinigie argued that political affiliation does not strip a Nigerian citizen of the right to observe elections, and that INEC—not the party—was responsible for vetting observers. He drew a parallel to the Nigerian president observing elections abroad without objection.
Additional challenges mounted. ADC candidate Bejide rejected the results entirely, alleging vote-buying, over-voting, and voter intimidation. In Nasarawa North, a senatorial by-election won by the APC's Halilu Dangadi Envwulanza also faced rejection, with one party claiming its logo had been omitted from ballots entirely.
Across other constituencies that weekend, the APC swept federal and state seats in Kano, Kebbi, and Ondo, while the PDP claimed a Rivers senatorial seat. But it was the single image of Tenebe in an INEC vest that crystallized a larger anxiety—whether Nigeria's electoral institutions can be trusted to operate independently, or whether 2027 will offer only the appearance of neutrality.
A photograph circulated on social media Saturday evening that would come to define the day's election in Ekiti State—not for the result itself, but for what it suggested about who was watching. In the image, Jarret Tenebe, the state chairman of the All Progressives Congress in Edo, wore an INEC-issued observer vest, the kind meant for neutral monitors of the electoral process. By Sunday morning, the picture had ignited a firestorm of accusations that the electoral commission had allowed a partisan operative to pose as an impartial witness to the governorship poll.
The election itself had produced a clear winner. Biodun Oyebanji, the incumbent APC governor, secured 319,224 votes, defeating Wole Oluyede of the People's Democratic Party, who garnered 40,543 votes, and Dare Bejide of the African Democratic Congress, who finished third with 12,872 votes. The result was announced around 3 a.m. Sunday by Professor Adenike Oladiji, INEC's chief returning officer and vice chancellor of the Federal University of Technology, Akure. Oyebanji became the first sitting governor in Ekiti's modern democratic history to win reelection. The APC celebrated the victory as historic. But the image of Tenebe in that vest had already begun to overshadow the outcome.
The Coalition of Registered Political Parties issued a statement calling the development disturbing and embarrassing. The coalition's leadership—chairman Samson Isibor and secretary Nkama Waribe—argued that allowing a top official of the ruling party to operate as an election observer reinforced public suspicion that INEC itself had become compromised. They went further: the incident raised fundamental questions about whether the electoral commission could be trusted to conduct the 2027 general elections fairly. The coalition declared it had lost confidence in INEC's current leadership to guarantee a level playing field for all parties.
Malachy Ugwommadu, a constitutional lawyer who served as national president of the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights from 2015 to 2019, articulated the legal and ethical problem plainly. Election observers, he explained, must come from nongovernmental and nonpartisan organizations precisely because their role demands independence. When a state party chairman from another state appears as an observer, he carries an inherent bias—a political interest in the outcome. Ugwommadu posed a direct challenge to INEC: on what grounds had Tenebe been accredited? What threshold had he met as a party chairman that qualified him to observe elections in a different state? The lawyer concluded the arrangement was improper.
The APC's response was to deny any wrongdoing. Uwadiae Igbinigie, the party's Edo State spokesman, argued that Tenebe had broken no law or protocol. Being a politician and APC member, Igbinigie said, did not strip Tenebe of his rights as a Nigerian citizen to serve as an observer. INEC had accredited him—that was the body responsible for vetting observers—and he had merely watched the process without participating in the election itself. Igbinigie drew a parallel to international practice: the president of Nigeria had been appointed as an observer in elections abroad, yet no one objected on grounds of his political status. Why, he asked, should the standard be different here?
The controversy over Tenebe's presence was not the only challenge to the election's credibility. Dare Bejide, the ADC candidate who finished third, rejected the results entirely. He alleged systematic vote-buying, over-voting, result manipulation, and voter intimidation. He claimed that political appointees and security operatives had been deployed in ways that transformed parts of the election into what he called a war zone. Money, he said, had been moved openly around polling units to sway voters. These allegations remained unresolved as the results stood.
The Ekiti election was one of several held that weekend. In Nasarawa North, a senatorial by-election saw the APC's Halilu Dangadi Envwulanza win with 45,362 votes, defeating Labour Party candidate Maku Labaran, who received 12,931 votes, and PDP's Emmanuel David Ombugadu, who secured 11,570 votes. Maku called for the election's cancellation, alleging widespread irregularities and INEC violations. The state chapter of the Nigeria Democratic Congress rejected the results as well, claiming the party's logo had been omitted from ballots and result sheets despite being a registered participant. The APC dismissed these complaints as opposition gimmickry.
Across other constituencies, the APC won federal and state seats in Kano, Kebbi, and Ondo, while the PDP claimed victory in a Rivers senatorial by-election. But it was the image of Tenebe in that INEC vest—a single photograph—that had crystallized a larger anxiety: whether Nigeria's electoral institutions could be trusted to operate independently, and whether the 2027 general elections would be conducted with genuine neutrality or merely the appearance of it.
Citações Notáveis
When a partisan political actor in the status of a state chairman comes to a different state as an observer, what is he observing? He has no clear vision but a biased vision.— Constitutional lawyer Malachy Ugwommadu
He is a Nigerian and he acted within the purview of the law. He didn't take part in the election, but merely observed the process.— APC Edo State spokesman Uwadiae Igbinigie, defending Tenebe's role
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why does it matter that a party official wore an observer vest? Isn't observation just observation?
Because observation is supposed to be neutral. If the person watching has a stake in the outcome, they're not really watching—they're protecting. It's the difference between a referee and a fan in a uniform.
But the APC says he didn't vote, didn't interfere. He just looked. Isn't that enough?
The problem isn't what he did in the moment. It's what his presence signals. If INEC accredits a ruling party official as an observer, what does that tell voters about INEC's independence? It tells them the institution itself may be tilted.
So this is really about trust in INEC, not about this one election?
Exactly. The Ekiti result is done. But the 2027 elections are coming, and if people already doubt INEC's impartiality, how will they accept those results? One photograph can undermine an entire institution's credibility.
The APC compared it to international observers who are politicians. Is that a fair point?
Not quite. International observers come from outside the system, representing their countries or organizations. A state party chairman observing an election in a different state—that's internal, that's domestic politics. The dynamics are completely different.