The Federal Government has remained silent over a resurfaced 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 campaign amounting to genocide.
The document, which formed part of a publication titled Nigeria’s Silent Slaughter: Genocide in Nigeria and the Implications for the International Community, has triggered renewed debate over the INEC boss’ views on the security crisis.
According to Daily Trust, efforts to obtain an official response from the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, were unsuccessful as calls and messages were not acknowledged as of press time.
Similarly, Amupitan has yet to react to the report since SaharaReporters first published the story on Friday. Multiple calls were placed to his phone, as well as a text message, which he did not answer. His Chief Press Secretary, Dayo Oketola, was also unreachable.
Sources within the commission told Daily Trust that the INEC chairman was “preoccupied with the Anambra governorship election” held over the weekend.
Amupitan, who contributed an 80-page chapter titled Legal Brief: Genocide in Nigeria, was sworn in as INEC chairman on October 23 following Senate confirmation.
Senate Denies Knowledge Of Amupitan’s Position
When contacted, the Senate spokesman, Yemi Adaramodu, said the upper chamber was unaware of the 2020 publication before screening Amupitan.
Adaramodu said, “I have never seen it. We are not privy to it. Something that the Senate has never seen. This is something that is not before us; something we don’t know.”
The publication, produced by the International Committee on Nigeria (ICON) and the International Organisation on Peace-building & Social Justice (PSJ), chronicled alleged systematic killings of Christians across Nigeria.
Amupitan’s legal argument reportedly claimed that the pattern and scale of attacks met the threshold for genocide under international law.
The brief also accused the Federal Government of complicity through alleged failure to protect affected communities and prosecute perpetrators.
The controversy comes days after the Federal Government dismissed similar genocide allegations following former U.S. President Donald Trump’s re-designation of Nigeria as a Country of Particular Concern (CPC), with threats of military action.
The government insisted that insecurity affects Muslims and Christians alike, blaming terrorism, banditry and socio-economic factors, not religious persecution.
Amupitan’s resurfaced position, which contradicts the government’s long-standing stance, has prompted the Supreme Council for Sharia in Nigeria (SCSN) to call for his removal as INEC chairman.
Amupitan’s Stand On Genocide In Nigeria
In the paper, Amupitan, who was then a faculty member at the University of Jos, Plateau State, said, among other things, that “it is a notorious fact that there is perpetration of crimes under international law in Nigeria, particularly crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide.
“One word that the Nigerian authorities and international investigators and rapporteurs have not mentioned (or simply refuse to mention) in respect of the protracted violence in Nigeria is ‘genocide.’ Is this a deliberate omission or an oversight?”
He added that the “alleged involvement of the state and non-state actors in the commission of crimes under international law in Nigeria has complicated an already complex situation. Consequently, the situation beckons the urgent need for a neutral and impartial third-party intervention, especially the UN and its key organs, the military and economic superpowers, and regional or sub-regional international organisations of intergovernmental character.
“In a globalised world, international law serves as a binding cord; state sovereignty diminishes to accommodate the common interests of the global community concretised by a mixture of consent, consensus and compelling norms.”
He added that “Boko Haram sect is a desire for the Islamisation of Nigeria. The Fulani ethnic militants, on their part, have engaged in the same anti-Christian violence as their Boko Haram counterparts.
“Since it is the agenda of the Fulani to Islamise the whole of Nigeria, they have used the machinery of the State, deliberately handed over to them by the colonialists, to advance their course at all times. The period of the military regime was used maximally to create states and LGAs, and set boundaries, in a manner that gives economic and political advantages to the Hausa-Fulani ethnic group. The military regime ensured that major strategic appointments went to the Hausa-Fulani group, while their promotions in the public service, especially in the military, police, and customs, were accelerated. The well-orchestrated plan paid off for them because the other ethnic groups did not realise their agenda to Islamise the whole of Nigeria, and by the time the plan was being understood by some, though not all, of the other ethnic groups, the damage had already become too much. The military, police, customs, and the public service as a whole have been taken over completely, with Islamic fundamentalists planted in strategic positions to supervise the final phase of the agenda.”
In his legal brief, Amupitan had advised that the U.S. Department of State refer the case to the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.
He had also called on the United Nations Security Council, its relevant organs, and major world powers to, among other recommendations, urge contracting parties to the Genocide Convention to sue Nigeria before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for failing to prevent and punish genocide as required under Articles 8 and 9 of the Convention; and consider military intervention by the UN, the African Union (AU) or ECOWAS forces as a last resort, in line with Article 42 of the UN Charter.
© 2025 Naijaonpoint, a division of NOP Media Inc. Contact us via [email protected]