Nigeria’s Senate has voted down a pivotal amendment in the Electoral Act 2026 that would have mandated real-time electronic transmission of election results from polling units, opting instead to retain the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) discretionary powers over transmission methods.
This decision, passed on February 3, 2026, after heated deliberations, preserves the 2022 Act’s framework allowing INEC to determine result collation procedures, rejecting compulsory uploads to the INEC Results Viewing Portal (IReV).
Critics warn this leaves a critical gap in constitutional backing for direct electronic transmission, potentially undermining future polls.
The rejected Clause 60(3) would have required presiding officers to upload results immediately after signing Form EC8A, countersigned by party agents, ensuring public access via IReV in real time.
Senators argued the term “real-time” was vague and impractical amid Nigeria’s uneven network coverage, risking legal challenges and disenfranchisement in remote areas.
Senate President Godswill Akpabio clarified that electronic transmission was not outright rejected, but made optional under INEC’s guidelines, a stance echoed by opponents of the mandatory clause.
Without explicit constitutional or statutory backing for direct electronic transmission, INEC’s IReV system—piloted in recent elections—remains a policy experiment rather than a legally enforceable standard.
This ad-hoc status weakens its utility in court, as parties cannot reliably cite electronic data to challenge results, perpetuating reliance on manual collation prone to human interference.
Historical disputes, like those in the 2023 polls where IReV glitches fueled litigation, highlight how lacking firm legal teeth exposes the process to manipulation.
A primary implication is eroded public trust in elections, especially as Nigeria approaches 2027 amid lingering skepticism from past irregularities.
Civil society groups, including Yiaga Africa, have long advocated for mandatory e-transmission to curb result falsification during physical collation, a notorious vulnerability in off-cycle polls like Ondo 2020.
The Senate’s vote signals legislative reluctance to prioritize technology over logistical concerns, potentially inviting accusations of protecting entrenched interests.
Legally, the absence of constitutional backing means electronic results hold secondary evidentiary weight compared to physical forms, complicating post-election tribunals.
Tribunal judges often prioritize paper trails, dismissing digital uploads as inconclusive without statutory mandate, thus prolonging disputes and delaying governance transitions.
This could exacerbate Nigeria’s cycle of protracted litigation, as seen in over 1,000 cases from 2023 elections.
From an accountability standpoint, discretionary transmission empowers INEC discretion but risks politicization, where network excuses mask delays or alterations.
Without real-time public verification, vote-buying and over-voting—already rampant—thrive in opaque collation centers, disproportionately affecting opposition strongholds.
Harsher penalties in the passed bill, like N500,000 fines for non-compliance with result transfer rules, fall short without tech enforcement, offering little deterrence.
Economically and developmentally, flawed elections hinder investor confidence and policy continuity, as disputed mandates stall reforms.
International observers note that peers like Ghana and Kenya have embedded e-transmission in law, boosting credibility; Nigeria’s lag perpetuates instability, diverting billions to security and legal costs.
Opposition parties like the PDP have condemned the rejection, fearing a repeat of 2023 controversies.
Operationally, poor rural connectivity—cited by senators—remains a red herring, as smart card readers succeeded in 93% of 2019 polling units despite similar challenges.
Hybrid models, blending uploads with physical copies as approved by the House of Representatives, could mitigate this, yet the Senate’s stance stalls harmonization.
Ultimately, without constitutional amendment via Section 52 of the 1999 Constitution, INEC’s innovations stay vulnerable to reversal by future chairs or courts.
For Nigeria’s democracy, this decision underscores a tension between caution and progress, prioritizing stability over transparency at a pivotal juncture.
Stakeholders urge bicameral reconciliation to reinstate safeguards, but the lack of binding e-transmission entrenches manual flaws, threatening 2027’s legitimacy.
As public outrage mounts on social media, pressure builds for presidential assent to withhold full reforms, signaling deeper governance deficits.