Dayo Babalola: INEC UK Protestors Were Paid, Not Diaspora

• UK-based Nigerian lawyer Dayo Babalola alleged that protesters against INEC Chairman Prof. Joash Amupitan in London were paid.
• The protest occurred outside Chatham House after Amupitan's engagement on Nigeria's 2027 elections, with demonstrators calling for his resignation.
• Babalola, an eyewitness, described the group as small, numbering 10-15 individuals, and not representative of the Nigerian diaspora.
• He claimed to have seen a man paying some of the protesters on Jermyn Street after the demonstration.
• Babalola asserted that the Chatham House event itself was well-attended and not disrupted by the external protest, which happened afterwards.

What transpired outside the venue should not be deliberately conflated with the quality, substance, or outcome of the official engagement.

A protest against Professor Joash Amupitan, the Chairman of Nigeria's Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), took place outside Chatham House in London. The demonstration occurred as Professor Amupitan was departing from an engagement titled, "Nigeria’s 2027 Elections: Democratic Trajectory and Regional Stability Beyond the Ballot," where he had addressed the country's democratic future, electoral processes, and preparations for the upcoming 2027 general elections.

Eyewitness Dayo Babalola, a Nigerian lawyer based in the United Kingdom, reported being present at the event on Thursday. He observed the protesters reportedly blocking Professor Amupitan's vehicle and demanding that he address alleged irregularities within the voters' register. The demonstrators also called for the INEC Chairman's resignation, accusing the electoral body of compromising its independence.

However, Babalola emphasized that the protest occurred after the formal Chatham House session had concluded. He stated that the incident should not be misconstrued as an interruption or disruption of the main event itself. He noted that some individuals involved in the protest were seen wearing memorabilia associated with Peter Obi, a political figure.

In a statement issued on Friday, Dayo Babalola alleged that some of the Nigerians protesting against Professor Amupitan were compensated for their participation. He firmly rejected claims that these individuals represented the broader Nigerian diaspora, characterizing the group as a small contingent of approximately 10 to 15 people. Babalola described circulating social media reports and videos of the incident as a significant misrepresentation of the actual events, asserting that the demonstrators' views did not reflect those of Nigerians residing in the UK or the wider diaspora community.

The situation outside Chatham House eventually drew the attention of the venue's security personnel, and the individuals dispersed after police were summoned. Babalola further claimed that he later encountered some members of the group on Jermyn Street, where he witnessed a man, identified by his "New Democratic Congress" memorabilia, distributing payments to them. He recounted a brief exchange with the individuals, suggesting they had earned some money.

Babalola also challenged assertions that the Chatham House engagement suffered from poor attendance. He reported that the venue was filled with nearly 200 participants, predominantly Nigerians who had pre-registered for the event. Additionally, 374 individuals registered and joined the program online, indicating a substantial level of interest in the engagement, both physically and virtually.

The UK-based lawyer maintained that Professor Amupitan was neither disgraced nor interrupted during his session at Chatham House, confirming that the INEC Chairman fully discharged his responsibilities as a panelist. Babalola stressed that what transpired outside the venue should not be deliberately conflated with the quality, substance, or outcome of the official engagement.

While acknowledging the fundamental right of Nigerians to express political opinions and protest against public officeholders, Babalola cautioned against presenting the actions of a small number of individuals as the collective stance of an entire community. He articulated that his intervention was motivated by a desire to correct misleading accounts of the incident, rather than to defend any particular political party.

Babalola expressed disappointment that some social media commentators chose to amplify a misleading narrative without first verifying the facts or understanding the context of the situation. He underscored the critical distinction between a legitimate protest and an attempt to fabricate a narrative for political objectives.

This article reports on a lawyer's personal observation and opinion regarding the nature of a protest against a Nigerian official abroad. It does not introduce new legal precedents, regulatory changes, or compliance obligations, and therefore has no direct actionable legal implication for lawyers or compliance officers.

Source: Original reporting via The PUNCH