The question of whether an INEC chairman can remain truly neutral is a complex one, primarily because the appointment process itself is deeply intertwined with the executive branch. While it is theoretically possible for an individual to maintain professional integrity regardless of who appointed them, the structural reliance on the president for appointments and funding creates a clear conflict of interest that breeds public skepticism. When the umpire's perceived affiliations align with those of the ruling party, it naturally erodes the trust of the electorate, making it difficult for the commission to be seen as a truly independent arbiter. Ultimately, achieving genuine impartiality likely requires structural reforms, such as changing how the chairman is selected to ensure oversight from multiple branches of government or civil society. Until such systemic changes occur, the shadow of political influence will unfortunately continue to loom over our electoral process.