I Am APC UK Chairman, Not an INEC Official!” — Tunde Doherty Breaks Silence Over Viral London Photo Controversy

Doherty denied claims that he was part of the INEC chairman’s official delegation, describing allegations circulating on social media as misleading.

The controversy began after a photograph showed a man wearing an APC-branded cap near the INEC chairman during his official engagement in London.

Some social media users wrongly identified the man as Professor Amupitan, while others alleged that an INEC official had attended the event wearing ruling-party clothing.

However, subsequent verification identified the man as Tunde Doherty, an APC politician based in the United Kingdom.

“I AM NOT AN INEC OFFICIAL”

In a statement dated November 14, 2026, Doherty rejected the allegations.

He declared:

“I am Hon. Tunde Doherty, the duly elected Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC) United Kingdom. I am not, nor have I ever been, an official, staff member, or delegate of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).”

Doherty insisted that his presence at Chatham House was entirely legitimate.

He explained that the institution regularly hosts public discussions on national and international affairs and that he had the right to attend an event concerning Nigeria’s democratic future.

WHY WAS HE WEARING AN APC CAP?

Doherty also addressed questions about his clothing.

He said:

“Wearing a cap bearing the insignia of the All Progressives Congress is a proud reflection of my political identity and leadership role within the party.”

He maintained that he had never concealed his political affiliation.

According to him, attending a public event while wearing party-branded clothing did not make him a representative of INEC.

Doherty further insisted that he neither travelled with the electoral commission’s delegation nor acted on its behalf.

VERYDARKMAN QUESTIONS THE MEETING

Popular social media activist Martins Vincent Otse, widely known as VeryDarkMan, also reacted to the controversy.

VeryDarkMan acknowledged that the man wearing the APC cap was not the INEC chairman.

He said:

“I watched the video carefully, and I didn’t see where the INEC chairman was wearing an APC cap.”

However, the activist questioned the circumstances under which an official of the ruling party interacted with the chairman of the electoral commission.

His concern was whether such interactions could create doubts about INEC’s neutrality ahead of the 2027 general elections.

The activist argued that the controversy should not be reduced to who wore the cap, but should also address public confidence in the electoral body.

EYEWITNESS GIVES DIFFERENT ACCOUNT

A firsthand account published on November 15 by political analyst Cheta Nwanze, who participated in the Chatham House event, provides further context.

Nwanze stated that Doherty did not arrive with the three-person INEC delegation and did not leave with them.

According to his account, Doherty approached members of the delegation after the public event, introduced himself and engaged in a brief conversation.

Nwanze also confirmed that the INEC chairman did not wear APC-branded clothing during the engagement.

This account supports Doherty’s explanation that his presence did not make him part of the electoral commission’s official team.

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED AT CHATHAM HOUSE?

Professor Joash Amupitan attended the November 12, 2026, event in London to discuss preparations for Nigeria’s 2027 general elections.

The discussion focused on electoral credibility, democratic stability and the responsibilities of INEC.

During the engagement, Amupitan faced questions about the commission’s independence and allegations that he had previously supported President Bola Tinubu and the APC.

He denied operating a social media account allegedly linked to pro-APC political statements.

The INEC chairman maintained that his loyalty was to the Nigerian Constitution and the Electoral Act.

PROTESTERS CONFRONT INEC CHAIRMAN

The London engagement also attracted protests from Nigerians who raised concerns about the credibility of the electoral process.

Some demonstrators confronted Amupitan outside Chatham House, questioning alleged irregularities in the voters’ register and demanding his resignation.

The protesters accused the electoral commission of political bias.

INEC has rejected allegations that it is working for the ruling party.

The confrontation added to the controversy surrounding the London visit.

FACT-CHECKERS DISMISS VIRAL CAP ALLEGATION

Independent fact-checking organisations subsequently examined the photograph.

Their findings identified the man wearing the APC-branded cap as Tunde Doherty rather than Professor Amupitan or an INEC official.

The findings contradicted viral claims that the electoral commission chairman had personally worn ruling-party clothing.

However, the correction does not prevent Nigerians from asking legitimate questions about how electoral officials interact with politicians.

THE BIG QUESTION: MUST INEC AVOID EVERY POLITICAL CONTACT?

The controversy raises an important distinction between political contact and political interference.

The chairman of an electoral commission may encounter politicians from different parties during public events.

Such encounters do not automatically establish bias, improper influence or wrongdoing.

However, INEC must remain independent and demonstrate impartiality in its decisions and conduct.

As Nigeria approaches the 2027 general elections, public confidence will depend on transparent electoral preparations, equal treatment of political parties and credible election administration.

NIGERIANS DESERVE FACTS, NOT MISLEADING PHOTOGRAPHS

The available evidence establishes that Tunde Doherty was the person wearing the APC-branded cap.

He was not an INEC official, and there is no verified evidence that he was part of Professor Amupitan’s official delegation.

But the controversy also reflects wider concerns about trust in Nigeria’s electoral institutions.

The central question should not be whether an APC politician attended a public event, but whether INEC’s actions demonstrate fairness and independence towards every political party.

WHAT IS YOUR OPINION?

Should the INEC chairman avoid informal interactions with prominent politicians from all political parties to protect public confidence?

Or is it unreasonable to question an electoral official simply because a politician approached him at a public event?

Credit X Reporting for Politics, Religion and Crime TV.