INEC Appointments: Questions emerge over nominees, state representation

President Bola Tinubu’s reported reappointment of Dr Baba Bila and nomination of six others to positions at INEC have raised questions about transparency, the distribution of appointments and the need for official confirmation ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Questions are emerging over the transparency and details of President Bola Tinubu’s reported nominations to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), particularly the proposed roles of the candidates, their states of representation and the process for filling the vacancies.

According to a report published on October 16, 2026, Tinubu reappointed Dr Baba Bila as a National Commissioner and nominated five other individuals for National and Resident Electoral Commissioner positions. The appointments are reportedly subject to Senate confirmation.

The report identified Professor Mustapha Aliu as the nominee for the North-West, Bashir Muhammed Umar for the North-Central and Mrs Oluwatoyin Babalola for the South-West. It also named Dr Samuel Akinjide Akinleye as a nominee for Ekiti State and Zahradden Basiru Sanusi, from Jigawa State, for a Resident Electoral Commissioner position.

However, the reported appointments raise an important question: what criteria guided the selection of the nominees, and how were the proposed state and geopolitical zone representations determined?

The available report provides names and proposed positions but does not set out the full selection criteria, the qualifications considered for each appointment or the detailed reasoning behind the nominations. These gaps do not establish that the process was improper, but they underline the importance of making the relevant information publicly accessible.

The timing of the reported nominations also makes the issue significant, with Nigeria preparing for the 2027 general elections. INEC is responsible for organising and overseeing elections, making public confidence in its independence, composition and administration particularly important.

The Senate’s confirmation process provides an opportunity to scrutinise the nominees and establish whether they meet the relevant requirements for their respective positions. Clear information about their professional backgrounds, proposed roles and the vacancies they are expected to fill would help Nigerians assess the appointments on the basis of verifiable facts.

Another question concerns the status of the announcement itself. Although media reports have listed the nominees, the original State House statement confirming the specific appointments was not located in the sources reviewed. Official confirmation is therefore necessary before all the reported details can be treated as established facts.

Ultimately, the central issue is not simply who has been nominated, but whether the process is sufficiently transparent for the public to understand how the candidates were selected and how the appointments fit into INEC’s institutional structure.

As the nominations await confirmation, the Presidency and the Senate can help address these questions by making the relevant appointment details and supporting information available to the public.