Some lawyers yesterday condemned the Senate’s rejection of the mandatory electronic transmission of election results. The Senate had on Wednesday rejected a proposal to make the electronic transmission of election results compulsory, but insisted that it has not removed electronic upload from Nigeria’s electoral law, clarifying that the existing Electoral Act already permits digital transmission at the discretion of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
The controversy followed the Senate’s clauseby-clause consideration of the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill, during which lawmakers voted down an amendment to Clause 60(3) that sought to mandate presiding officers to electronically transmit polling unit results to INEC’s Result Viewing (IReV) portal in real time after signing and stamping Form EC8A.
Instead, the chamber retained the current wording in the Electoral Act, which provides 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.”
By rejecting the amendment, the Senate declined to hard-wire mandatory electronic transmission into the statute, leaving the mode of results transfer to INEC’s operational guidelines rather than making it an absolute legal requirement.
Reacting to this, a constitutional lawyer, Dr. Abdul Mahmud noted that, “Senate’s rejection of mandatory electronic transmission of election results aligns with what Nigerians have long observed about the All Progressives Congress (APC), the party that holds a majority.
Since coming to power in 2015, the party has shown little inclination toward genuine electoral reform, only responding when public pressure forces amendments to the Electoral Act. “The rejection of electronic transmission of election results in real time is therefore unsurprising.
APC has not demonstrated itself as a reform-driven party, and legislative action under its control has historically required sustained civic insistence rather than proactive initiative. “The rejection portends the continuation of Nigeria’s entrenched democratic crisis.
It signals the fact that the ruling party which constitutes as an objection to free and fair elections will persist, making meaningful electoral transparency unlikely without persistent civic pressure.
For Nigerians, it foreshadows a recurring cycle of disappointment, where reforms are delayed, diluted, or blocked, and where the spectre of electoral manipulation remains a constant threat.
Another lawyer, Abiodun Olugbemide, in his own reaction, said;” as much as I share the supposed sentiments of an average Nigerian on this issue of real time results transmission, one crucial thing that I want people to see, not just trying to talk law, is the peculiarity of loopholes in whatever good our system tries to present.
“We must focus on the voter’s register first. Voter’s register must be transparent and clear. In the last election, several dead people were ‘seen’ voting, while foreign names also appeared on the list! “Today, my mission is not just to talk as a lawyer, quoting provisions, but we must get it right.
If Voter’s register is tampered with, real time results transmission is useless. I am talking about a closer look at Voters Eligibility Act. “Also, we must put into consideration, several fac- tors that must be put in place, to ensure the real time results transmission.
This exercise requires uninterrupted power supply, and a thoroughly monitored system that will guarantee the actual time each electoral process begins at each polling unit and when it ends.
“To come home on this discussion, what Senate has just done is a projection and a forecast, thereby presenting a prevention, in which nobody will be able to sue INEC for not using electronic transmission of results in the coming elections.”
