LOOPHOLES IN THE NEW ELECTORAL LAW

The Electoral Act 2026, birthed from the controversial 2025 Bill, is being celebrated by the ruling APC establishment as a masterstroke of modernization.

In reality, it is a sophisticated Trojan Horse—a legislative framework meticulously designed to provide a veneer of legality to what could be the most coordinated electoral heist in the nation’s history.

​Under the guise of resolving litigations early and embracing digital biometrics, the current administration has built a labyrinth of loopholes that essentially disenfranchises the voter before they even reach the polling unit.
On paper, the 2026 Act makes electronic transmission of results mandatory. However, the devil is in the semantics. By failing to use the absolute, non-negotiable language of “shall” consistently across Section 60, the law leaves a back door wide open.

Civil society groups have already flagged this deliberate confusion. In 2027, when “technical glitches” inevitably strike in opposition strongholds, the law will allow for a retreat into manual collation—the dark room where figures are inflated, and the will of the people is buried. 
The pivot away from the Permanent Voter Card (PVC) toward a purely biometric-reliant system is a classic case of voter suppression masked as progress. By making the physical card optional, the APC government has placed absolute power in the hands of the BVAS operators and polling officials.

Without a physical card as a receipt of rights, any voter can be turned away under the pretext of “system failure” or “biometric mismatch,” with no tangible proof of their attempt to vote. This is not innovation; it is the strategic creation of “blind spots” in our franchise. The most insidious “reform” is the six-month deadline for electoral litigations. While the nation groaned under prolonged court cases in the past, the 2026 Act’s solution is a “justice-by-deadline” trap.
By forcing complex, multi-state fraud cases to conclude before inauguration, the law ensures that high-level rigging—which takes time to investigate and prove—will be dismissed simply because the clock ran out. It effectively grants a “rigging license” to anyone who can stall a court case for 180 days.

​The foundation of any fair contest is an independent umpire. Yet, the 2026 Act stubbornly preserves the President’s power to appoint INEC Commissioners. We are entering 2027 with a referee appointed by one of the players.

Without an independent vetting body or the implementation of the long-sought Justice Uwais Report, INEC remains a subsidiary of the Presidency, rather than a guardian of the Republic.

Erasmus Ikhide, ikhideluckyerasmus@gmail.com