The Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria (SCSN) has issued a statement clarifying its earlier demand for the removal and prosecution of Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Chairman Professor Joash Ojo Amupitan, insisting that the position is not motivated by religion or sectarian bias.
Last week, SCSN called for Amupitan’s immediate dismissal and legal action, alleging that his integrity had been compromised after he reportedly confirmed claims of persecution and genocide against Christians in Nigeria in a 2020 legal brief submitted to foreign actors.
The council argued that such conduct undermined public trust in INEC’s neutrality and the credibility of Nigeria’s electoral process.
The statement triggered widespread reactions, including criticism from the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) in the 19 northern states and the FCT, which accused SCSN of weaponizing religion for political ends.
In a fresh clarification issued on February 2, 2026, SCSN said its resolution—adopted during its Annual Pre-Ramadan Conference and General Assembly on January 28, 2026—had been misconstrued and taken out of context.
“The Council states unequivocally that its position is not motivated by religion or sectarian considerations, but by grave concerns relating to national cohesion, institutional integrity and constitutionalism,” the statement read.
SCSN pointed out that since Nigeria’s independence in 1960, most heads of electoral bodies have been Christians, with only two Muslims—Professor Attahiru Jega and Professor Mahmood Yakubu—having served as chairmen.
“At no point have Muslims mobilised opposition against any chairman on religious grounds. All were accepted on the basis of institutional legitimacy, not faith. This historical record decisively invalidates the claim that the present call is rooted in religious bias,” the council stated.
The group maintained that what sets Amupitan’s case apart is his documented conduct and views, particularly the 2020 legal brief it described as “toxic, provocative and deeply prejudicial” against Nigerian Muslims and Northern Nigeria.
Key concerns raised include:
– Claims of a “Christian genocide” in Nigeria
– Attempts to link contemporary insecurity in the North to the 19th-century jihad of Sheikh Uthman bin Fodio
– Presentation of such narratives to foreign actors, portraying Nigeria as facing religious extermination
“These claims are historically inaccurate and dangerously destabilising in a fragile, multi-religious country like Nigeria,” SCSN said.
The council also rejected the genocide narrative, noting that violence in Northern Nigeria is complex and affects both Muslims and Christians, with Muslims forming the majority of victims in states like Borno, Yobe, Zamfara, Katsina, and Sokoto.
“Advancing a one-sided persecution narrative is intellectually dishonest,” it added.
SCSN argued that anyone whose past writings demonstrate bias or hostility toward a major faith group cannot command public trust as INEC chairman in a plural society.
It cited alleged reputational damage, financial costs to Nigeria (including reports of millions paid to foreign lobbyists to counter the claims), and embarrassment as sufficient grounds for removal and accountability.
Since the controversy emerged, Amupitan has not publicly denied authoring the document, issued an apology, or retracted the statements, while the Federal Government has reportedly worked to counter the claims internationally.
