CHUKWU DAVID reports that the passage of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill by the Senate has provoked controversy and arguments within the National Assembly and the nation’s political space in general, with the lawmakers receiving condemnation in the court of public opinion for allegedly dragging the country’s democracy backward
S ince the Senate considered and approved the report of its Ad-hoc Committee on Electoral Matters on the Electoral Act Amendment Bill Amendment Bill, the country’s political landscape has been in turmoil, with most Nigerians blasting members of the Red Chamber, for allegedly betraying the confidence Nigerians reposed in them to come up with legislations for the good governance of the country.
The genesis of the controversy was section 60 of the amendment bill dealing with the transmission of election results. The Senate voted down a recommendation by its Committee on Electoral Matters, which sought to compel presiding officers to upload polling unit results to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) Result Viewing Portal (IREV) portal in real-time.
The lawmakers rather retained the provision contained in the Electoral Act, 2022, which mandates electronic transmission of results in a manner prescribed by INEC after votes have been counted and announced at the polling unit. Under the retained provision, the presiding officer is required to count votes at the polling unit, record the scores on prescribed forms, announce the results publicly, and transmit the results electronically to the appropriate collation centre as directed by the commission.
However, it has been observed that this clause is ambiguous and subject to manipulation in the law courts, a development that cropped up after the 2023 general election, when litigations were made for adjudications by candidates who were dissatisfied with the outcome of the polls, particularly the presidential election.
In October 2023, for instance, the Supreme Court of Nigeria ruled that the electronic transmission of election results was not mandatory under the Electoral Act, 2022. The Court affirmed that INEC has the legal authority and discretion to determine the specific mode for collation and transmission of election results. The apex court clarified that the IReV portal is not a collation system as it was intended only for public viewing.
The court further ruled that failure or unavailability of results on IReV does not invalidate an election outcome or halt the manual collation process. The apex court emphasized that the Electoral Act, 2022 did not explicitly mandate “electronic transmission” only; rather, it allows INEC to prescribe any manner it deems fit, which may include manual or electronic methods. This decision was part of the final judgment dismissing appeals by Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Peter Obi (Labour Party), thereby affirming the victory of President Bola Tinubu, who was the candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC).
So, what the Senate did last week was to reject a provision in the bill that aims at making electronic transmission of results mandatory for the 2027 elections, choosing to retain the current discretionary powers of INEC. Before the Senate passed the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, 2025, it had embarked on about five-hour clause-byclause consideration of the report of its seven-man Ad-hoc Committee on Electoral Matters.
However, the chamber ended the passage of the bill with a seeming confusion on the issue of electronic transmission of election results by rejecting the recommendation of the committee and adopting what is contained in the principal Act. The senators also amended some other provisions, while the majority of the clauses were retained as originally proposed. One of the amendments was to reduce the timeline for INEC to publish a notice of election from 360 days to 180 days.
Meanwhile, the President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, in his remarks, announced that a joint Committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives would meet to harmonise areas of differences in the Senate and the House versions of the bill, before it would be sent to President Tinubu for assent.
Senator Simon Lalong, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters, will lead the harmonisation Committee from the Red Chamber. Other members are Tahir Monguno, Adamu Aliero, Orji Kalu, Abba Moro, Asuquo Ekpeyong, Aminu Abass, Tokunbo Abiru and Niyi Adegbonmire. However, preempting public reactions, Akpabio quickly countered what he described as public claims that lawmakers had rejected electronic transmission entirely.
He claimed that the Senate did not remove the electronic transmission of election results from the enacted legislation. He said: “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 Act has made allowance for electronic transmission. So, it is still there as part of our law.
We cannot afford to be going backwards”. Other key amendments adopted by the Senate, seek to bar the courts from declaring a runner-up as a winner of an election in which he/she scored less than 20 per cent of the total votes cast in a situation where the actual winner gets disqualified. In this instance, the court is required to order a re-run that will exclude such disqualified candidate and the political party that fielded such ineligible candidate. This relates mainly to candidates who used forged certificates for INEC screening during their nomination processes.
Senators wow to stand ion electronic transmission of results
However, as Nigerians continue to blast the Senate for rejecting electronic transmission of election results realtime, some senators in an obvious image laundering mission, addressed a press conference and insisted that the Red Chamber did not take such action as widely reported in the media.
The senators, who made the declaration, expressed serious shock and embarrassment over reports in the media on Thursday, emanating from the consideration and passage of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, 2025, on Wednesday.
Thirteen senators, who cut across the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and the opposition parties, led by Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, representing Abia South Senatorial District on the platform of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), briefed journalists to make clarifications on the contentious matter.
Other senators at the broefing include Abdul Ningi (PDP, Bauchi Central), Austin Akobundu (PDP, Abia Central) Peter Jiya (PDP, Niger South), Ireti Kingibe (ADC, FCT), Victor Umeh (LP, Anambra Central), Binos Yaroe (PDP, Adamawa South), Kabeeb Mustapha (PDP, Jigawa South West, Khalid Mustapha ( PDP, Kaduna North), Mohammed Onawo (APC, Nasarawa South), Aminu Waziri Tambuwal (PDP, Sokoto South), Tony Nwoye (LP, Anambra North) and Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan (PDP , Kogi Central). Addressing journalists on the action the Senate took on the Electoral Bill, Abaribe said the concerned senators were compelled to address what he described as widespread misunderstanding of the Senate’s proceedings during Wednesday’s plenary. He said: “Since yesterday (Wednesday), the media has been awash with reports suggesting that the Senate rejected electronic transmission of election results.
That is not correct. To put the record straight, the Senate did not. The Senate, I repeat, did not reject electronic transmission of results as provided for in the 2022 Electoral Act.” He explained that what the Senate passed was electronic transmission of results, a position which, according to him, was also clarified by the President of the Senate during plenary, stressing that senators hold public trust derived from the confidence reposed in them by their respective constituencies.
Abaribe further stated that the senators considered it necessary to address the issue in the interest of transparency, saying: “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 outlined the legislative process that led to the Senate’s decision, beginning with the Joint Committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives on Electoral Matters, noting that the committee held several retreats within and outside Abuja, with the participation of INEC and civil society organisations.
According to Abaribe, following the submission of the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters’ report, an Ad-hoc Committee was constituted to further review the report, noting that the ad-hoc committee, chaired by Senator Sadiq Umar, presented its findings, which were considered and debated during a closed 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. He pointed out that the Senate Electoral Committee, the ad-hoc committee and senators unanimously agreed at the executive session on the provision for electronic transmission of results as contained in section 65 of the bill.
“At plenary, we also passed electronic transmission of results. However, because of movement and noise in the chamber, it appeared to some that something went wrong,” he said, adding that the senators later sought confirmation and were reassured, noting that video records also show the Senate President affirmed that electronic transmission of results was passed.
He further explained that a harmonisation committee was set up because of the differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill on issues such as timelines, saying: “The role of the harmonisation committee is to reconcile differences between both versions and produce a single document for presidential assent.”
However, he noted that the Senate did not yet adopt the Votes and Proceedings of Wednesday, which is a procedural requirement before harmonisation can commence, assuring that the Senate will reconvene to adopt the Votes and Proceedings, which he insisted, must accurately reflect the provision on electronic transmission of results. “After plenary yesterday, we adjourned without adopting the Votes and Proceedings.
Under our rules, harmonisation cannot begin without that step. Only after that can the harmonisation committee meet. At harmonisation, you either adopt the House version or the Senate version, nothing else,” he said.
Also speaking, a member of the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters, Abdul Ningi, said that the committee began work on the bill as far back as September 2024 and conducted about 27 public hearind across the country. He maintained that the Senate leadership will ensure that due process is followed and that the final document reflects the will of the legislature as resolved in the executive sessions that preceded the consideration and passage of the bill.
But as the debate on social and conventional media continue unhindered on the action of the Senate on the bill, Nigerians are looking up to the joint Senate and House harmonisation Committee to do justice to the document by ensuring that electronic transmission of election results is unambiguously captured in the bill in order to restore the already eroded confidence of the people in the electoral system.
