Senate as a Threat to Credible Elections

The Senate’s rejection of electronic transmission of election results in the Electoral Amendment Bill, despite its critical role in restoring public trust, is a blow on free, fair and credible elections in 2027 and clear evidence of how Nigeria’s lawmakers sacrifice patriotism on the altar of partisanship, Davidson Iriekpen writes

After what political analysts and opposition parties viewed as a deliberate delay, the All Progressives Congress -dominated Senate last Wednesday passed the much-expected Electoral Act, 2022 (Repeal & Enactment) Bill, 2026. The bill was passed after consideration and approval of the 155 clauses. While amendments were made to a few clauses, the majority were retained as proposed.

But what shocked many Nigerians was the rejection of a proposed amendment to Clause 60, Subsection 3, of the bill, which sought to make the electronic transmission of election results from polling units compulsory.

The rejected provision would have required presiding officers of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to electronically transmit results from each polling unit to the IReV portal in real-time, after the prescribed Form EC&A had been signed and stamped by the presiding officer and countersigned by candidates.

The red chamber adopted the existing provision of the Electoral Act, 2022 which states that “the presiding officer shall transfer the results, including the total number of accredited voters and the results of the ballot, in a manner as prescribed by the commission.”

The rejection followed an amendment made by Senator Tahir Monguno (Borno, APC) who proposed that the transmission aspect be removed while the original provision be retained.

After the rejection, Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, speaking tongue-in-cheek to hoodwink Nigerians, said the red chamber did not remove the electronic transmission of election results from the law.

“Distinguished colleagues, the social media is already awash with reports that the Senate has literally rejected electronic transmission of results. That is not true. What we did was to retain the electronic transmission, which has been in the Act and was used in 2022.

“So, please, do not allow people to confuse you. If you are in doubt, we will make our final votes and proceedings available to you if you apply. This Senate under my watch has not rejected the electronic transmission of results. It is in my interest as a participant in the next election for such to be done. So, please don’t go with the crowd.

“We have retained what was in the previous provision by way of amendment. That was all we did. The previous has made allowance for electronic transmission. So, it is still there as part of our law. We cannot afford to go backwards.”

But the truth he did not tell Nigerians was that in October 2023, the Supreme Court of Nigeria ruled that the electronic transmission of election results was not mandatory under the Electoral Act 2022.

The apex court affirmed that INEC had the legal authority and discretion to determine the specific mode for transmitting and collating election results. It clarified that the INEC Result Viewing (IReV) portal was not a collation system and was intended only for public viewing because the 2022 Electoral Act did not recognise it as a collation instrument.

It further ruled that failure or unavailability of results on IReV did not invalidate an election outcome or halt the manual collation process.

This decision was part of the final judgment dismissing appeals by Atiku Abubakar (PDP) and Peter Obi (Labour Party), thereby affirming the victory of President Bola Tinubu.

Even while many Nigerians had adjudged the Electoral Act 2022 as the most progressive electoral legislation in Nigeria’s recent history, several loopholes such as widespread vote manipulation, voter suppression, compromised technology, legal ambiguities, and post-election injustice, were exposed.

These ambiguities, which were the grounds for extensive legal fireworks after the elections, were what Nigerians expected the Senate to resolve.

Besides, since 2015, the courts have maintained that innovations like Smart Card Reader, BVAS and IReV require statutory enactment to enjoy the force of law. This position of the Supreme Court creates contradictions in the electoral system, which the Senate would have resolved.

It is illogical, analysts argue, for the courts to maintain that electronic transmission into the IReV portal is not a legal requirement simply because it was introduced in the guidelines rather than in the Electoral Act.

However, the courts, in several cases such as Jegede v. INEC and Wike v. Peterside, have established that INEC regulations and guidelines have no binding effect. 

It was these judicial positions that INEC sought to address with its proposal to amend the Electoral Act, explicitly providing for the electronic transmission of results to enhance the credibility of future elections.

This was why on May 12, 2025, INEC, which bears the brunt of disputed elections, forwarded 142 post-election recommendations to the National Assembly, with eight of them requiring amendments to the 1999 Constitution or the Electoral Act 2022. 

Electronic transmission of results from polling units is one of the most effective guardrails against ballot snatching, result alteration, and post-election disputes. By insisting that INEC should retain the vague discretionary powers on how results are transmitted, the Senate has preserved the very loopholes that have historically been exploited to subvert the will of voters.

The rejection of compulsory electronic transmission of results, alongside the compression of critical electoral timelines and restrictions on voter access to digital tools by the lawmakers, is a conscious attempt to reopen the space for manipulation in the 2027 elections.

Equally troubling is the reduction of timelines for election preparation and candidate disclosure. These compressed timelines increase the risk of logistical failures, weaken transparency, and disadvantage voters while empowering political insiders who thrive in chaos and opacity.

This is why observers have described the action of the Senate as a betrayal of public trust and a deliberate attempt to weaken all the guardrails for credible elections.

Since the 2023 general election, the consistent clamour by the people has been for the electronic transmission of results.

Those who spoke with THISDAY said the decision of the upper legislative chamber to reject the electronic transmission of election results is one of the most retrogressive and anti-people decisions taken by the Nigerian legislature since the return to democracy in 1999.

 At a time when democracies across the world are strengthening their electoral systems through technology, the Senate has chosen to protect loopholes, and preserve a system that has historically enabled manipulation, tampering, and post-election disputes.

Real-time electronic transmission of results is not a partisan demand; it is a democratic safeguard. It reduces human interference, limits result manipulation, and ensures that the will of the voter—expressed at the polling unit—is faithfully reflected in the final outcome. 

As Nigerians prepare for the general election, another cycle plagued by preventable logistical crises, legal ambiguities, and public distrust is facing them as the Senate has placed partisan considerations above patriotism and national interest.