By Paul Okojie

Nigeria’s electoral credibility is facing another serious test, and this time the troubling revelations are coming from within the institution constitutionally entrusted with protecting the integrity of the ballot. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has disclosed that 54 of its personnel across 10 states have been identified as complicit in irregularities associated with voter registration. This is not an ordinary administrative failure. It is a development that raises fundamental questions about the security of Nigeria’s electoral database and the preparedness of the commission for the 2027 general elections.

The controversy began when Nigerians examining INEC’s preliminary Register of Voters discovered suspicious photographs, alleged duplicate registrations, unusual identities and records belonging to deceased persons. Of particular concern were screenshots reportedly showing suspicious, AI-generated-looking photographs attached to voter profiles in Ward 11, Etsako West Local Government Area of Edo State. What initially appeared to be another case of administrative negligence soon developed into a national electoral integrity controversy.

INEC’s Director of Information and Communication Technology, Dr Lawrence Bayode, subsequently acknowledged that some registration officers allegedly exploited their official access credentials to introduce questionable records into the registration database. This admission is particularly disturbing. It suggests that the vulnerabilities were not necessarily limited to external cyberattacks or the activities of desperate political actors but may have involved individuals entrusted with managing the commission’s own registration infrastructure.

The commission’s subsequent disclosure makes the situation even more troubling. INEC Chairman, Professor Joash Amupitan, announced on November 9, 2026, that 1,608,660 invalid registrations had been removed following a nationwide verification exercise. Another 873 records belonging to verified deceased persons were reportedly removed as a separate category. More significantly, 54 individuals across 10 states were identified as allegedly complicit in registration irregularities and could face disciplinary action, including prosecution.

These figures are staggering. Out of 11,088,238 registration records harvested from the three phases of the 2025/2026 Continuous Voter Registration exercise, the commission’s Automated Biometric Identification System flagged 1,545,052 for further examination. Subsequent investigations and public complaints led to further scrutiny and the removal of records found to be invalid. Although an automated flag does not automatically establish fraud, the scale of the eventual exclusions demands a serious institutional explanation.

For an electoral commission preparing to conduct a general election in a country of more than 200 million people, the discovery of such extensive irregularities should be treated as an institutional emergency. The voters’ register is the foundation upon which the democratic process rests. If its credibility is questionable, every subsequent stage of the electoral process becomes vulnerable to suspicion.

What is particularly concerning is the possibility that individuals within the electoral system could manipulate registration procedures for purposes that go beyond administrative convenience. Artificially generated photographs, substituted identities and multiple registrations, if deliberately introduced, could potentially facilitate electoral fraud, impersonation and other forms of manipulation. However, Nigerians deserve evidence-based explanations rather than assumptions about who may have benefited from the irregularities.

Edo State deserves particular attention. The emergence of suspicious voter profiles associated with Etsako West raises questions that must not be swept under the carpet. INEC must clarify whether Edo State is among the 10 states where the 54 officials were identified, how many questionable records originated from the state, which registration centres were affected and whether any Permanent Voter Cards were produced or collected in connection with the disputed records.

The commission must also explain whether the questionable registrations were isolated incidents or part of a coordinated attempt to compromise the electoral database. If the alleged manipulation involved registration officers, who supervised their activities? What authentication procedures were bypassed? Were their login credentials compromised, or did they deliberately abuse their authorised access? These are questions that require forensic investigation, not administrative assurances.

We acknowledge INEC’s decision to clean up the register and identify personnel allegedly responsible for the irregularities. We also recognise the importance of public participation in exposing weaknesses within the electoral system. However, removing suspicious records after they have been exposed is not enough. Nigerians need to know how the records entered the database in the first place and what guarantees exist that similar incidents will not occur during subsequent registration exercises.

There is also a need for greater transparency in the commission’s figures. INEC reported 1,608,660 invalid registrations and 873 deceased-person records removed, but some subsequent reports presented a combined figure of 1,609,553. These stated components add up to 1,609,533, leaving a discrepancy of 20 records. While this may be a reporting or arithmetic error, an institution responsible for the accuracy of the national voters’ register should promptly reconcile and explain such inconsistencies. Electoral credibility requires numerical precision as much as institutional integrity.

More importantly, INEC must resist the temptation to treat this controversy as a matter that can be resolved through internal disciplinary procedures alone. Where credible evidence establishes deliberate criminal conduct, the affected personnel must be investigated and prosecuted in accordance with the law. Their names, the states involved, the nature of their alleged offences and the outcomes of investigations should be made public, subject to due process and the protection of legitimate privacy rights.

The commission must also strengthen its technological safeguards through independent cybersecurity audits, biometric verification, access controls, digital activity logs and transparent procedures for handling exceptional registration cases. Its proposed artificial intelligence policy should be concluded and published without unnecessary delay. Technology must strengthen electoral credibility, not become an instrument through which the democratic process can be undermined.

We further urge civil society organisations, political parties, election observers and the media to intensify independent scrutiny of the voters’ register. Nigerians should be encouraged to verify their registration details and report suspicious entries through official channels. Such scrutiny must be conducted responsibly, without exposing citizens’ personal information or turning unverified allegations into established facts.

The 2027 general elections must not become another exercise in which Nigerians are asked to trust an electoral system that has failed to adequately explain its vulnerabilities. The responsibility rests squarely on INEC to demonstrate that it can protect the integrity of every legitimate vote.

Ultimately, democracy is not secured by the announcement of election results. It is secured by the credibility of the processes that produce those results. A questionable voters’ register creates room for public distrust long before the first ballot is cast.

INEC must therefore go beyond announcing that 54 officials have been identified and more than 1.6 million invalid registrations removed. It must tell Nigerians who was responsible, how the irregularities occurred, what political or administrative interests, if any, were involved, and what concrete measures will prevent a recurrence.

Nigeria cannot afford an electoral system in which those entrusted with protecting the people’s votes become suspects in compromising the process. The 2027 elections must be protected before election day, beginning with a clean, credible and independently verifiable voters’ register.

That is the minimum Nigerians should demand, and the minimum INEC must deliver.

Paul Okojie is a journalist and a media consultant