The Nigerian Senate is taking action to quell growing political unrest and public mistrust of the Electoral Amendment Bill, as an emergency meeting is planned for Tuesday due to a dispute over the electronic transfer of election results.
The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, has described deliberate misrepresentation of proceedings in the Red Chamber of the National Assembly as the main issue. Another question at the heart of the controversy is whether the Senate weakened a crucial transparency safeguard by changing provisions on the real-time electronic transmission of results.
The Senate never rejected the electronic transmission of election results at any point during the proceedings, Akpabio said in response to growing criticism.
According to the Senate President, “the Senate never rejected electronic transmission of election results.” Our focus was on how to handle real-time transmission in Nigeria’s unequal network coverage, especially in remote and difficult-to-reach areas.
It was anticipated that passing the Electoral Amendment Bill, which aimed to improve the 2022 Electoral Act, would go somewhat smoothly. Rather, it has sparked a national discussion about trust, aspirations, and Nigeria’s election transparency future. There were swift charges that MPs were reversing hard-won election reforms after it was revealed that the Senate had eliminated the bill’s requirement for real-time electronic transmission. Opposition parties accused the Senate of reopening loopholes for manipulating results, while civil society organizations (CSOs) cautioned of a risky rollback.
The Senate leadership had to react to the swiftness and severity of the criticism, and they decided to call an emergency meeting for next Tuesday. Narrative distortion, according to Akpabio, is the problem.
He insisted, “What was discussed was how to avoid creating legal problems where network coverage is unavailable,” emphasizing that electronic transmission is still firmly a part of the current statute as revised.
Opposition senators have frequently been outspoken in their criticism of the Senate leadership, but this time they mostly agreed with Akpabio’s explanation, albeit with a more nuanced focus. Opposition politicians, led by Senate Minority Leader Senator Abba Moro, stated that the Senate had agreed on real-time electronic transmission of results, but they advised against interpreting it in strict legal terms that may disqualify elections for any reason, including network failure.
According to an opposition lawmaker with knowledge of the discussion, “real-time transmission was agreed upon, but the concern was that the law should not become a trap where elections are annulled simply because of technical limitations beyond the control of voters or the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).”
“Lawmakers wanted to increase the use of technology in elections without creating a scenario where the results are based on infrastructure failure instead of voter choice,” Moro said. Even while it hasn’t completely reassured a cynical public, this unusual opportunity for the Senate President and opposition MPs to come together highlights how complicated the situation is.
Legislators defend the Senate’s stance, saying it strikes a balance between embracing technology and preventing elections from being thrown out due to procedural issues. They highlight Nigeria’s varied landscape, ongoing infrastructure deficiencies, and security issues and caution that a strict legal requirement for real-time transmission that does not account for extraordinary situations may exacerbate litigation following the election.
Previously, courts have been sought to declare election results void on the basis of purported procedural errors rather than proof of tampering. Senators declare that they are committed to preventing a situation in which voter intent is overruled by a technical setback. The Senate will not enact laws that give electoral results to network providers rather than to voters, Akpabio has emphasized time and again. The Senate is still completely committed to holding credible elections and using technology to increase transparency.
Public mistrust has persisted in spite of these guarantees. Real-time electronic transmission is now more than just a technical feature; for many Nigerians, it represents the integrity of the voting process. For many years, it has been thought of as the most susceptible phase of the electoral process, acting as a barrier against interference between polling places and collation centers.
Election observer and Yiaga Africa Executive Director Samson Itodo has cautioned that rather than settling post-election problems, ambiguity in electoral legislation frequently makes them worse. He notes that when the law is imprecise, interpretation becomes politicized and public trust starts to decline.
Prof. Jibrin Ibrahim, a political scientist and electoral expert, also noted that time has becoming political in Nigeria. He said that any delay, no matter what the reason, creates suspicion after the results leave the polling station.
This ingrained skepticism explains why Senate answers, no matter how thorough, have had difficulty winning back the public’s faith.
The official purpose of the emergency meeting is to resolve any misunderstandings and provide the foundation for future alignment with the House of Representatives.
Legislators also unofficially admit it’s a damage management exercise. If the dispute is not resolved, it may become more difficult to harmonize, lead to fresh pressure from civil society, or even cast doubt on the president’s decision to sign the bill.
Nigeria’s Senior Advocate and constitutional attorney, Sebastine Hon., cautioned that the dispute has transcended legislative drafting and now involves institutional legitimacy. Technical explanations are less important to Nigerians than whether election reforms are being quietly negotiated or strengthened, he said.
For a Senate already beset by public disenchantment with elite consensus politics, the idea of eroding election protections bears significant political consequences.
The current conflict is reminiscent of previous conflicts that almost caused the 2022 Electoral Act to fail during its approval due to similar disagreements regarding electronic transmission. Network issues were noted by lawmakers then, as they are now. As it does now, public pressure compelled more explicit promises. Only the political climate has altered. A more technologically engaged population, changing coalitions, and more opposition scrutiny have made it so that legislative actions are now reviewed in real time, and technical amendments are rarely left technical for very long.
Dr. Tunji Olaopa, a public policy analyst, pointed out that Nigerians are now questioning every sentence for possible flaws because they have learnt from the past and believe that election reform is no more only an elite discussion.
The Independent National Electoral Commission is caught in the midst of the dispute. INEC has made significant investments in electronic transmission infrastructure and has stated time and time again that it is prepared to use technology to improve transparency. However, it has also issued warnings about operational difficulties in parts of the country that are rural, unsecure, or have inadequate connectivity.
The commission, which is required to provide speed, transparency, and uniformity across wildly disparate terrains, is under tremendous pressure from a statute that endorses real-time streaming while acknowledging network limits.
Unless the final harmonised version of the bill is clear, legal scholars warn, judges may be left to decide what “real time” actually means, which could convert technical discussions into legal battlegrounds.
How much discretion Nigeria’s political elite is ready to give up to transparent, technologically advanced election processes is a larger question raised by the disagreement, which goes beyond the phrasing of a single phrase. For critics, deterrence is weakened by any ambiguity. Rigid drafting puts legislators at danger of injustice due to technical malfunctions. Voters have a simpler fear: once a loophole is established, it is rarely used.
The Senate will determine if electoral reform is a negotiated compromise or a steadfast democratic commitment as it gets ready for Tuesday’s emergency session and eventual harmonization with the House of Representatives. Clear communication is essential in a nation where elections are sometimes decided in courtrooms as well as voting places. The currency of trust is this.
