A United Kingdom-based Nigerian lawyer, Otunba Dayo Babalola, has alleged that some protesters who confronted the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Amupitan, outside Chatham House in London were paid to stage the demonstration.
Babalola, who said he was physically present at the event on Thursday, claimed he later witnessed a man wearing New Democratic Congress (NDC) memorabilia allegedly paying some of the protesters on Jermyn Street.
He also dismissed claims that the demonstrators represented Nigerians in the diaspora, describing them as a small group of between 10 and 15 individuals whose actions should not be generalised as the position of Nigerians living in the United Kingdom or elsewhere.
In a statement reacting to videos and reports circulating on social media, the lawyer described the accounts of the incident as a gross misrepresentation of what transpired, insisting that the protest did not disrupt the official engagement.
“Diaspora Nigerians? Nothing could be further from the truth,” he said.
“I was physically present at Chatham House yesterday, and I can state categorically that the narrative being circulated on social media is a gross misrepresentation of what actually transpired.
“Those involved in the incident were not a representation of Nigerians in the diaspora, nor were they a reflection of the audience that attended the event.”
Amupitan had attended a Chatham House engagement titled, ‘Nigeria’s 2027 Elections: Democratic Trajectory and Regional Stability Beyond the Ballot’, where he discussed Nigeria’s democratic future, the electoral process and preparations for the 2027 general elections.
The controversy followed a demonstration by a group of protesters outside the venue as the INEC chairman was leaving. Reports said the demonstrators blocked his vehicle and demanded that he address allegations of irregularities in the voters’ register, while also calling for his resignation over claims that the electoral commission had compromised its independence.
However, Babalola maintained that the demonstration occurred after the formal engagement and should not be portrayed as an interruption of the programme.
According to him, Amupitan made contributions to the discussion and responded to questions from participants before the protest took place.
The lawyer further alleged that some of the protesters were wearing memorabilia bearing the image and branding of Peter Obi.
“I was physically present throughout the incident and witnessed the recording of several videos that are now being circulated. Some of those involved were wearing Peter Obi branded memorabilia,” he said.
He added that the situation attracted the attention of Chatham House security, while the demonstrators dispersed after the police were called.
Recounting what he described as his subsequent encounter with some of the protesters on Jermyn Street, Babalola alleged that he saw a man wearing NDC memorabilia paying them.
He said the individuals recognised him, hurled insults at him and that he responded by suggesting that they had made some money to meet their immediate needs.
Babalola also challenged claims that the Chatham House engagement was poorly attended, saying the physical venue had close to 200 participants, mostly Nigerians who had registered for the event.
He added that about 374 people registered and participated in the programme online, arguing that the figures reflected considerable interest in the engagement.
The lawyer said the protesters were outside the premises and did not participate in the programme.
To establish that his account was based on personal observation, he said he was visible in some of the videos circulating online.
“I was actually visible in the circulating video between approximately 2:22 and 2:45, standing by the main entrance of Chatham House, dressed in a suit and holding my muffler. I mention this simply to establish that my account is not based on hearsay,” he said.
He insisted that Amupitan was neither disgraced nor interrupted during the engagement, adding that the INEC chairman fully discharged his responsibilities as a panelist.
“What happened outside the venue afterwards should not be deliberately conflated with the quality, substance or outcome of the official engagement,” he said.
While acknowledging the right of Nigerians to express political opinions and stage peaceful protests against public office holders, Babalola cautioned against presenting the actions of a handful of individuals as the collective position of the Nigerian diaspora.
“People are entitled to their political opinions. They are equally entitled to peaceful protest and to demand accountability from public office holders.
“However, political disagreement must not become an excuse for misinformation, sensationalism or the deliberate distortion of events. A handful of individuals cannot legitimately be presented as the voice of the entire Nigerian diaspora,” he said.
He explained that his intervention was not intended to defend any political party but to correct what he considered misleading accounts of the incident.
“There is a clear distinction between a legitimate protest and an attempt to manufacture a narrative for political propaganda,” he added.
Babalola maintained that Amupitan attended the engagement, delivered his presentation, answered questions and participated in the panel discussion, while the demonstration by a small group took place outside the venue afterwards.
