How Procedural Breach Halts Electoral Reform Bill’s Debate in Senate

Sunday Aborisade, in this piece, captures how a mild drama that unfolded at Senate plenary last Thursday stalled a debate on Nigeria’s Electoral Reform Bill.

In what turned out to be one of the most dramatic moments of Nigeria’s 10th Senate, the upper chamber was thrown into confusion last week when the President of the Senate, Senator GodswillAkpabio ordered that the controversial Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2025 be stepped down, citing the shocking absence of the bill’s text for circulation among Senators.

The bill, described as a “holistic reform package” aimed at strengthening Nigeria’s electoral system, was scheduled for second reading. But what began as a routine legislative procedure quickly degenerated into a tense procedural standoff that rekindled questions about the integrity of Nigeria’s lawmaking process.

When Deputy Senate President, Senator JibrinBarau presided over the session in Akpabio’s temporary absence, the chamber was set to debate the far-reaching amendments proposed by Senator Simon Lalong, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters.

But before the discussion could begin, several Senators raised a crucial point. They had not been given copies of the bill.

“It’s not attached,” one Senator protested from his seat. “How do we discuss a bill we’ve not seen?”

Unfazed, Barau urged his colleagues to proceed, arguing that the debate was only about the “general principles” of the bill and not its details.

He said, “The nitty-gritty of the bill is not necessary at this stage. We are only required to discuss its general principle before the second reading.”

However, the chamber quickly descended into confusion as Senators murmured, visibly uncomfortable debating a law they hadn’t read. “It’s like holding a town hall on a law that doesn’t yet exist,” one lawmaker quipped off the record.

The discomfort intensified when some Senators pointed out that the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters had already held a public hearing on the bill, a move many saw as a breach of parliamentary order.

“How can you gather public opinion on a bill that hasn’t even been presented?” another lawmaker asked rhetorically.

When Senate President Akpabio returned to the chamber, he immediately sensed the tension. Taking control of the proceedings, he cut through the confusion with firm authority. “This Senate will not discuss what it has not seen,” Akpabio declared to a loud applause.

“You cannot debate a document that is not before you. We must be guided by procedure, not assumption,” he insisted.

The statement effectively reversed his deputy’s earlier directive, bringing the proceedings to a decisive halt.

Senate Leader, Senator OpeyemiBamidele, quickly moved a motion for the bill to be stepped down to allow for “further consultation and proper circulation of the text.” Minority Leader, Senator Abba Moro, seconded the motion, emphasizing that the matter required “deeper engagement” before debate.

Akpabio then put the motion to voice vote. The “ayes” had it. “The time today is not auspicious to proceed,” Akpabio said. “We have a loaded agenda, and Nigerians expect us to conduct ourselves with transparency and diligence. Let us not debate an unseen bill.”

While the official explanation for the chaos was the missing text of the bill, insiders hinted at deeper procedural lapses within the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters. According to legislative observers, committees are only empowered to hold public hearings after a bill has passed second reading, not before.

Critics described the episode as “putting the cart before the horse,” arguing that such lapses undermine public confidence in the legislative process.

“The Senate hasn’t even considered the bill; how then do you gather public opinion?” a lawmaker asked. “That’s not how lawmaking works.”

Despite the confusion, the content of the proposed Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2025 remains one of the most ambitious reform efforts in recent memory.

Lead sponsor, Senator Simon Bako Lalong described the bill as “a holistic reform package” designed to close loopholes exposed during the 2023 general elections.

“If we get it right, we will restore public trust, reduce post-election disputes, and strengthen INEC to function without interference,” Lalong told his colleagues while presenting the bill for consideration.

Among its key objectives are the early release of election funds to the Independent National Electoral Commission, clarity on electronic transmission of results and the creation of a digital voter register with QR-coded IDs.

It also contains stronger internal democracy in political parties with tighter rules for primaries and candidate substitutions, harsher penalties for vote-buying, falsification of results, and other electoral crimes.

It equally included a review of campaign finance limits to curb money politics, and greater institutional independence for INEC, insulating it from executive interference.

Lalong said the bill seeks to make elections more credible, competitive, and reflective of the people’s will.

“This bill is about more than Election Day. It’s about strengthening the very foundation of democracy,” he clarified.

In a rare moment of candour, Akpabio delved into his personal experience during the 2019 general elections, a case that was later annulled by the courts.

He said, “I was cheated in the 2019 elections. The court annulled the election because the mutilations were terrible and ordered that the returning officer be prosecuted. But instead of prosecuting the real offenders, the Resident Electoral Commissioner and his collaborators, they went after a professor who merely announced results.”

Akpabio argued that any genuine reform must make INEC more accountable for infractions, not just its field officers.

“INEC must take responsibility. We cannot continue punishing lower officers for crimes directed from the top,” a visibly angry Akpabio declared.

He also raised concerns about extended campaign timelines and governance disruptions caused by prolonged electioneering seasons.

“You can’t have ministers or public officers abandoning their duties for nearly a year just to campaign. Governance suffers when politics consumes everything,” he insisted.

Thursday’s episode exposed more than a procedural blunder, observers noted that Akpabio’s action was rare in Nigeria’s Senate history.

 “Akpabio was asserting control,” a Senator told THISDAY after the plenary. “It was as much about the bill as it was about authority,” he added.

The move also reaffirmed Akpabio’s grip on the chamber, reminding his colleagues and perhaps the executive,  that legislative processes must follow due order, especially on politically sensitive reforms like elections.

Analysts believe the incident underscores the Senate’s ongoing struggle to balance speed with scrutiny in the reform process. Dr. Samuel Olasope, a political analyst in Abuja, said the episode “reflects the persistent institutional weakness in Nigeria’s legislature.”

He said, “How can a major national reform bill reach the stage of public hearing without members having copies? That speaks to an alarming breakdown in legislative coordination.”

Olasope noted that while Akpabio’s intervention was necessary to preserve procedure, “it also exposes how easily the process can be compromised if leadership vigilance lapses.”

Despite the setback, most Senators agree that electoral reform remains urgent.

The 2023 elections, though the first under the Electoral Act 2022, left lingering controversies over result transmission, candidate substitution, and party primaries issues which the new bill seeks to resolve.

Lalong’s committee maintains that it has worked jointly with its counterpart in the House of Representatives for over a year, consolidating inputs from past electoral experiences and civil society recommendations.

A member of the committee told THISDAY that “The work is far advanced. What happened on the floor was a procedural error, not a policy crisis. Indeed, Akpabio’s decision to defer the bill was not a rejection but a tactical pause”.

He emphasized that the Senate would resume debate “after the text is circulated and members are fully briefed.”

The Senate is expected to revisit the bill in the coming weeks after leadership consultations and proper distribution of the document. A closed-door session may also be convened to clarify sensitive provisions before public debate resumes.

Meanwhile, pressure is mounting from civil society groups and electoral reform advocates who see the bill as a test of the National Assembly’s commitment to electoral integrity.

As the dust settles, the episode has left a lasting lesson for the legislature, that in the pursuit of reform, process is as important as purpose. By stepping down the bill, Akpabio may have delayed the conversation on electoral reform. But in doing so, he also reinforced the principle that democracy must not only deliver credible elections, it must also be built on credible lawmaking.