FG has maintained silence as INEC Chairman Amupitan faces backlash over controversial 2020 Genocide Report.
NaijaOnPoint Nigeria reports that the Federal Government has maintained silence amid mounting controversy surrounding a 2020 legal brief reportedly authored by the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Professor Joash Amupitan, in which he described Boko Haram attacks and alleged killings by “Fulani herdsmen” as part of a coordinated anti-Christian genocide in Nigeria.
The resurfaced document, titled “Nigeria’s Silent Slaughter: Genocide in Nigeria and the Implications for the International Community,” has reignited fierce debate over Amupitan’s past views on insecurity and religious violence in the country.
According to Daily Trust, repeated efforts to obtain an official reaction from the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, were unsuccessful, as calls and messages were ignored at press time. The INEC boss himself has also remained silent since the story was first published by SaharaReporters, while his Chief Press Secretary, Dayo Oketola, could not be reached for comment.
Sources within INEC said the chairman was “preoccupied with the Anambra governorship election” over the weekend, amid growing calls for him to clarify his position on the resurfaced publication.
Amupitan, who contributed an 80-page legal analysis titled “Genocide in Nigeria” to the controversial report, was appointed and sworn in as INEC chairman on October 23, 2025, following Senate confirmation.
Senate Distances Itself
Reacting to the development, Senate spokesman Yemi Adaramodu said the upper chamber was unaware of Amupitan’s previous publication before his confirmation.
“I have never seen it. We are not privy to it. This is something that was not before us,” he said.
The publication, jointly produced by the International Committee on Nigeria (ICON) and the International Organisation on Peace-building & Social Justice (PSJ), alleged systematic killings of Christians and accused successive Nigerian governments of complicity by failing to protect victims or prosecute attackers.
Amupitan’s legal argument in the paper reportedly claimed that the pattern and scope of such attacks met the threshold for genocide under international law, a stance that sharply contradicts the Federal Government’s long-standing position that Nigeria’s insecurity is driven by terrorism, banditry, and socio-economic conditions — not religious persecution.
Calls for Removal Intensify
Following the renewed exposure, the Supreme Council for Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) has reportedly called for Amupitan’s removal as INEC chairman, arguing that his past statements could compromise his neutrality in a country already divided along religious and ethnic lines.
Content of the Controversial Brief
In the legal brief, written when he was a law professor at the University of Jos, Amupitan alleged that:
“There is perpetration of crimes under international law in Nigeria — particularly crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide.”
He further accused the state and non-state actors of complicity, urging international intervention by the United Nations, the U.S. Department of Justice, and other global powers.
Amupitan went as far as calling on contracting parties to the Genocide Convention to sue Nigeria before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for failing to prevent or punish genocide, and even recommended possible military intervention by the UN, AU, or ECOWAS as a last resort.
He also controversially asserted that both Boko Haram and Fulani ethnic militants share a “common agenda to Islamise Nigeria,” and accused past military regimes of empowering “Islamic fundamentalists” through strategic appointments and political restructuring.
Government Yet to Respond
Despite the storm surrounding the INEC chairman’s previous comments, the Federal Government has yet to issue any statement, even as observers warn that the controversy could undermine confidence in the nation’s electoral body ahead of upcoming elections.
The silence from both Aso Rock and INEC continues to fuel speculation about how much the authorities knew of Amupitan’s controversial past writings before his appointment — and whether the issue could evolve into a full-blown political crisis.