INEC, Editors and the Battle for Trust Ahead of 2027 - THISDAYLIVE

Iyobosa Uwugiaren, who attended the recent seminar organised by the Nigerian Guild of Editors and the Independent National Electoral Commission, examines the issues and concerns raised at the workshop.

With the 2027 general elections only 100 days away, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and the Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE) have started confronting what many stakeholders in the democratic process described as one of the most difficult questions facing Nigeria’s democracy: how can public confidence in elections be restored and sustained in an age of misinformation, political tension and declining institutional trust?

That burning question dominated the strategic workshop for editors organised by the NGE in collaboration with INEC in Abuja recently.

The meeting was more than another pre-election engagement between the electoral umpire and the media. It was an acknowledgement by both institutions that the credibility of an election is shaped long before voters arrive at polling units on the election day.

For INEC Chairman, Prof. Joash O. Amupitan (SAN) the challenge is clear. Electoral integrity cannot be secured by the commission alone. It requires what he described as a partnership among electoral institutions, the media and civil society.

“The ultimate arbiter of electoral integrity is public trust,” the INEC chairman said. He argued that such trust cannot be constructed in isolation.

His message was significant. Nigeria has witnessed elections in which legal and technological reforms were introduced with the promise of improving transparency, only for operational difficulties, disputed results and poor communication to undermine public confidence.

The 2023 general election remains an important reference point. Technology, particularly the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV), were expected to improve the credibility of the process. But technical and operational difficulties, especially concerning result transmission and publication, became major sources of controversy. That experience hangs over preparations for 2027.

Therefore, Amupitan sought to reassure Nigerians that INEC is not merely preparing for another election but attempting to address weaknesses identified in previous exercises.

According to him, the commission has introduced improvements to BVAS, acquired 57,000 new devices, strengthened result-management systems and deployed measures aimed at improving cybersecurity.

There is also a renewed emphasis on online voter registration and printable voter cards. More than 10 million new voter registrations were recorded during the three phases of the Continuous Voter Registration exercise, according to the commission. INEC said that the national register now contains more than 103 million voters following the completion of its biometric verification and clean-up processes.

No doubt, the figures are impressive. But the real test is not the size of the register or the sophistication of the technology. The real test is whether Nigerians believe that the system will work when it matters most.

That is where the relationship between INEC and the media becomes critical.

The media remains one of the principal channels through which citizens understand elections. For millions of Nigerians, especially those who may not have direct access to electoral officials, newspapers, radio, television and digital platforms provide the information needed to understand registration, accreditation, voting procedures, results and electoral laws.

The editor therefore occupies an influential position. Amupitan described editors as “the final filter” in an increasingly chaotic information environment. He urged newsrooms to prioritise fact-checking and verification, warning that fake results, manipulated videos, deepfakes and unverified reports could inflame tensions and delegitimise an otherwise credible election.

There is little doubt that this threat is real. The information environment surrounding elections has changed dramatically. Political actors can communicate directly with voters without passing through traditional media gatekeepers. A short video, an altered photograph or a fabricated election result can travel across social media platforms within minutes.

By the time a newspaper or television station establishes the facts, millions of people may already have encountered the falsehood. But there is an important qualification to INEC’s call for closer media collaboration.

The media must collaborate with INEC without becoming its public relations arm.

A credible election requires accurate reporting, but accurate reporting does not mean uncritical reporting. Journalists must verify information from INEC, but they must also scrutinise information provided by the commission.

The media’s responsibility is not simply to repeat what the electoral umpire says. It is to ask whether what the commission says can be independently verified.

That is why the opening statement by NGE President, Mr. Eze Anaba, was particularly important. Anaba acknowledged the responsibility of editors to uphold accuracy, fairness, balance and the public interest. But he equally emphasised that the media cannot perform its role effectively without credible, timely and accessible information from INEC. That represents an important two-way bargain. If INEC expects journalists to reject rumours, it must provide reliable information quickly enough to fill the information vacuum in which rumours thrive.

Silence from an electoral management body can be as damaging as misinformation from political actors.

When voters cannot obtain authoritative information about the location of polling units, technical problems, postponed processes or results, speculation inevitably fills the gap.

This is perhaps one of the most important lessons from previous elections: communication is not an accessory to election management. It is part of election management.

The same principle applies to technology.

INEC’s technological ambitions are welcome. BVAS can strengthen voter accreditation; electronic result management can improve transparency; online services can reduce barriers to voter registration; and cybersecurity systems can protect sensitive electoral data. But technology must not become a substitute for institutional accountability. A sophisticated machine can fail. A computer system can experience downtime. Data can be corrupted. Networks can collapse. Software can malfunction. Cybersecurity systems can be attacked.

Consequently, the question Nigerians should ask is not simply how much technology INEC is deploying but whether there are credible contingency arrangements when technology fails.

There must also be mechanisms through which journalists, political parties, civil society organisations and voters can independently establish what happened.

Transparency is strongest when it is verifiable by people outside the institution providing the information.

The same principle applies to INEC’s claim of zero tolerance for electoral offences. Vote-buying, political violence, intimidation and electoral manipulation have repeatedly threatened Nigerian elections. The chairman’s warning to political actors that attempts to buy votes or deploy violence will attract sanctions is therefore welcome.

But Nigerians have heard similar warnings before. What matters now is enforcement. The credibility of the 2027 elections will depend partly on whether electoral offences are investigated and prosecuted regardless of the identity, wealth or political influence of the person involved.

An election cannot be described as truly credible if powerful offenders believe that political connections will protect them from consequences.

INEC’s proposed collaboration with law-enforcement and financial institutions to monitor vote-buying and illegal campaign spending could be significant. But such cooperation must operate within the law and must not be selective.

The issue of violence is equally serious. The chairman’s warning that political competition must not become a “clash of weapons” comes at an important moment. The history of Nigerian elections shows that violence can discourage participation, displace voters and undermine confidence in the democratic process.

As the Executive Director of the International Press Centre, Lanre Arogundade, said, safety of journalists must be treated as an essential component of electoral integrity.

Reporters cannot provide independent coverage if they are intimidated, assaulted or prevented from reaching polling units and collation centres.

The proposed collaboration between INEC, security agencies and the media to protect accredited journalists is consequently necessary. But protection should never become a justification for restricting legitimate reporting. A journalist who witnesses misconduct must be able to report it—even when the allegation concerns an electoral official or security personnel.

This brings the discussion back to trust. Amupitan, Anaba, Arogundade, Dr Tony Onyima and other speakers at the workshop, identified trust as the foundation of credible elections. They are right. But trust cannot be created through official assurances alone.

It must be earned through consistent behaviour.

INEC must demonstrate that it can communicate bad news as effectively as good news. It must acknowledge mistakes when they occur and explain how they are being corrected.

The media, on its part, must accept that speed cannot replace accuracy and that political excitement cannot replace evidence.

Editors have an especially difficult responsibility. They must navigate between the pressure to publish first and the obligation to publish correctly.

In the era of social media, the temptation to chase breaking news can be enormous. Yet an erroneous election result published by a major media organisation can have consequences far beyond a correction published several hours later.

The NGE’s proposed stronger relationship with INEC should therefore be structured around verification rather than dependence. Regular briefings, dedicated communication channels, rapid fact-checking mechanisms and access to technical experts could help.

But the relationship must preserve the independence of the press.

Indeed, the media should be INEC’s partner in democracy, not its cheerleader. Civil society organisations also have an important role in this triangle. They can provide independent observation, document irregularities and bring the concerns of marginalised groups—including women and persons with disabilities—to the electoral process.

The success of the proposed partnership will ultimately depend on whether all three sides are willing to accept scrutiny. INEC must be prepared to be questioned.

The media must be prepared to be corrected. Civil society must be prepared to challenge both. That is what democratic accountability requires.

As the country approaches the 2027 elections, the Abuja workshop has opened an important conversation. But the real value of the workshop will be determined by what happens after the speeches. Will INEC’s promises of transparency translate into accessible information? Will new technology work reliably? Will journalists be protected?

Will vote-buying and political violence attract meaningful sanctions? Will errors be acknowledged rather than defended? And will the media maintain sufficient independence to scrutinise the electoral umpire even while working with it?

Those questions are more important than the rhetoric of partnership. Nigeria’s democracy does not need a media that is hostile to INEC, just as it does not need an electoral commission that is hostile to criticism. What the country needs is something more difficult: institutions that can cooperate without compromising their independence.

The 2027 election will therefore be a test not only of INEC’s capacity to conduct elections, but also of the country’s wider democratic ecosystem.

The ballot box is important, but so is the information environment surrounding it.

If voters receive accurate information, if electoral procedures are transparent, if technology is independently verifiable, if political offenders are held accountable and if journalists can report freely and safely, public confidence can grow.

But if information is withheld, technology fails without credible explanations, political actors act with impunity and the media becomes divided between propaganda and sensationalism, trust will remain fragile. The message from the INEC–NGE workshop is therefore both hopeful and cautionary.

Nigeria has the opportunity to make the 2027 elections a demonstration of institutional learning. But that opportunity will not be secured by speeches alone. It will be secured by evidence.

Ultimately, the most powerful partnership between INEC and the media should not be one in which both institutions agree on everything. It should be one in which they agree on the importance of democracy—and remain sufficiently independent to challenge one another when the public interest demands it. That may be the real battle for 2027: not merely winning votes, but winning the confidence of the people who cast them.

Founded on January 22, 1995, THISDAY is published by THISDAY NEWSPAPERS LTD., 35 Creek Road Apapa, Lagos, Nigeria with offices in 36 states of Nigeria , the Federal Capital Territory and around the world. It is Nigeria’s most authoritative news media available on all platforms for the political, business, professional and diplomatic elite and broader middle classes while serving as the meeting point of new ideas, culture and technology for the aspirationals and millennials. The newspaper is a public trust dedicated to the pursuit of truth and reason covering a range of issues from breaking news to politics, business, the markets, the arts, sports and community to the crossroads of people and society.

You can email us at: hello@thisdaylive.com or visit our contact us page.