Contrary to the news making the rounds, the Senate Minority Caucus Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe has clarified that the Senate did not reject the electronic transmission of election results while passing the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill.

Abaribe’s clarification followed public backlash that the 10th National Assembly voted against the electronic transmission of results and a proposed 10-year ban for vote buyers and other electoral offenders.

New Telegraph reports that the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, had dismissed the purported news report as misleading.

Akapbio stressed that lawmakers retained provisions for electronic transmission as contained in the 2022 Electoral Act, in order to avoid legal and operational complications.

Addressing journalists on Thursday, Abaribe said the caucus found it necessary to correct what he described as a misinterpretation of proceedings during Wednesday’s plenary.

“Since yesterday, the media has been awash with reports suggesting that the Senate rejected the electronic transmission of election results. That is not correct,” Abaribe said.

“To put the record straight, the Senate did not — I repeat, did not — reject electronic transmission of results as provided for in the 2022 Electoral Act.”

READ ALSO:

He added that the Senate, in fact, passed the provision on electronic transmission of results, a position he said was also clearly stated by the Senate President during plenary.

Abaribe said senators considered it important to clarify the issue because they hold public trust derived from their constituents.

“We came here under the trust of our senatorial districts. When it appears that our actions have been misunderstood, it becomes necessary to clarify exactly what happened,” he said.

The senator outlined the legislative process that preceded the passage of the bill, noting that a joint committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives on electoral matters conducted several retreats, both within and outside Abuja.

According to him, the retreats involved stakeholders such as the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and civil society organisations.

“At the end of those retreats, everyone agreed that electronic transmission of results was the way to go. That position was reflected in the reports presented to both chambers,” he said.

Abaribe described electronic transmission of results as a core provision that remained non-negotiable throughout deliberations, which also included public hearings and extensive debates.

He said that following the submission of the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters’ report, an ad hoc committee was set up to further review the document.

The ad hoc committee, chaired by Senator Sadiq Umar, presented its findings, which were discussed during a closed-door session.

“The closed session was held to tidy up all outstanding issues so that when we returned to plenary, the bill could be passed without rancour,” he explained.

Abaribe said the Senate Committee, the ad hoc committee, and lawmakers at the executive session unanimously agreed on the provision for electronic transmission of results as contained in Section 65 of the bill.

“At plenary yesterday, we passed the electronic transmission of results. However, because of movement and noise in the chamber, it appeared to some that something went wrong,” he said.

He added that senators later sought clarification and were reassured, noting that video recordings showed the Senate President affirming that electronic transmission of results was approved.

The senator further explained that a harmonisation committee would reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill, particularly on timelines.

“The role of the harmonisation committee is to reconcile differences between both versions and produce a single document for presidential assent,” he said.

However, he noted that harmonisation could not commence until the Senate formally adopted its Votes and Proceedings, a step that had not yet been taken.

“After plenary yesterday, we adjourned without adopting the votes and proceedings. Under our rules, harmonisation cannot begin without that step,” he explained.

Abaribe assured that the Senate would reconvene to adopt the Votes and Proceedings, insisting that it must correctly reflect the provision on electronic transmission of results.

“Only after that can the harmonisation committee meet. At harmonisation, you either adopt the House version or the Senate version — nothing else,” he said.

He reiterated that what the Senate passed was real-time electronic transmission of election results.

“This is not a party matter,” Abaribe added. “Senators across party lines agree on this because transparent, free, and fair elections are the foundation of democracy. If results are not transparent or the process is distorted, then it is not a democracy.”

Responding to questions on the role of the ad hoc committee, the caucus said the Senate was within its rights to regulate its internal processes and that relevant committee members were present to clarify issues during deliberations.

The caucus concluded that no harmonisation could lawfully take place until the Senate formally adopts the Votes and Proceedings confirming electronic transmission of election results.