A United Kingdom-based Nigerian lawyer, Dayo Babalola, has alleged that some Nigerians who protested against 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 witnessed the incident on Thursday, described the protesters as a small group of between 10 and 15 people, dismissing claims that they represented Nigerians in the diaspora.
In a statement on Friday, the lawyer accused some social media commentators of misrepresenting the incident, insisting that the protest occurred after Amupitan’s official engagement and did not disrupt the programme.
Amupitan had attended a Chatham House discussion titled, “Nigeria’s 2027 Elections: Democratic Trajectory and Regional Stability Beyond the Ballot,” where he spoke on Nigeria’s democratic future, electoral processes and preparations for the 2027 general elections.
The protesters reportedly gathered outside the venue as the INEC chairman was leaving, demanding his resignation and accusing the electoral commission of compromising its independence.
However, Babalola alleged that some protesters, including individuals wearing Peter Obi-branded memorabilia, were paid to participate in the demonstration.
He claimed that he later encountered some of them on Jermyn Street, where he allegedly witnessed a man wearing New Democratic Congress memorabilia handing them money.
Babalola also dismissed reports that the Chatham House engagement was poorly attended, saying the venue accommodated close to 200 participants, while about 374 people registered and joined the programme virtually.
He maintained that Amupitan completed his presentation, answered questions and participated fully in the panel discussion without interruption.
The lawyer acknowledged the right of Nigerians to protest against public officials but warned against presenting the actions of a handful of individuals as the collective position of Nigerians living abroad.
“There is a clear distinction between a legitimate protest and an attempt to manufacture a narrative for political propaganda,” he said.
Babalola added that his intervention was aimed at correcting what he described as misleading accounts of the incident, rather than defending any political party.