Who’s Afraid of New Electoral Act?

By Eric Elezuo

The furore generated with the passing of the Electoral Bill 2026 by the Nigerian Senate, is yet to die down as various groups, sections and institutions, have continued to lend their voices in condemnation of the tactical removal of the proposed real-time electronic transmission of results.

The Civil Society Organisations and Action Aid have declared a protest to kickoff on Monday, February 9, 2026, titled Occupy NASS Protest, until the Senate find reason to listen to Nigerians, and do what is right, and that aligned with the aspirations of Nigerians, according Samson Itodo, the Executive Director of YIAGA Africa.

In the same vein, the African Democratic Congress has pledged to begin a protest in Abuja on Monday over the removal of real-time clause in the new electoral bill.

The Senate, on Wednesday, passed the Electoral Bill 2026 following hours of debate, but ended up rejecting a proposal to mandate real-time electronic transmission of election results while however, approving significant reforms to election timelines, penalties for electoral offences and voting technology.

The Boss learnt that at the centre of the controversy was Section 60, which governs the transmission of polling unit results, where the Senators voted down a recommendation by the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters that would have compelled presiding officers to upload results to the INEC Result Viewing (IReV) portal in real time. The rejection has drawn the irk of majority of Nigerians, who have have wondered if anyone is actually afraid of the new electoral law? If yes, who? And what could be the reason behind such fears as the need to regulate a hitchfree and smooth and fair electoral process have remained the goal and aspirations of politically savvy Nigerian.

But the lawmakers, contrary to the yearnings of most Nigerians, have retained the approach in the 2022 Electoral Act, which allows electronic transmission after votes are counted and publicly announced at the polling unit. In other words, giving approval to transfer of results instead of transmit in real-time of results.

In their defence however, Senators opposing the real-time upload argued that inconsistent network coverage and logistical challenges could trigger legal disputes and undermine electoral credibility.

The rejected proposal was contained in the new Clause 60(5) of the draft bill, which aimed to mandate presiding officers to electronically transmit polling unit results in real time after completing and signing Form EC8A.

The clause was designed to strengthen transparency and reduce electoral malpractice through technology-driven result management.

The motion to reject the electronic transmission clause was swiftly seconded by the Deputy President of the Senate, Barau Jibrin.

Similarly, the Senate also rejected a proposed amendment under Clause 47 that would have allowed voters to present electronically-generated voter identification, including a downloadable voter card with a unique Quick Response (QR) code, as a valid means of accreditation.

In his defensive remarks, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Adeyemi Adaramodu, described the debate as a process subjected to an invisible world of semantics.

“Electronic transmission remains part of the law,” he said, “and results will continue to be available to the public both electronically and through physical forms, ensuring verifiable records for disputes,” Adaramodu said.

In his own defence, President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, though admitted that the Senate deliberately deleted the provision for “real-time” transmission of election results from the Electoral Bill, 2026, noted however, that the Senate took the decision because it believed that “technology must save and not endanger democracy.”

Speaking at the launch of a book, “The Burden of Legislators in Nigeria”, authored by Senator Effiong Bob, in Abuja, Akpabio likened the issues raised in the book to the challenges faced by lawmakers in the course of their duties, including the controversy and alleged “abuses” directed at the Senate following the passage of the electoral bill.

The Senate President argued that the entire country could be thrown into chaos if, for instance, network or power failure affected the uploading of results.

He insisted that Form EC8A and other official election records should remain the most reliable means of declaring results.

“All we said was to remove the word ‘real-time’ to allow INEC decide the mode of transmission. If you make it mandatory and there is a system failure, there will be a serious problem,” Akpabio told the gathering, further confirming that the bill, as passed, excluded real-time electronic transmission of results.

Continuing, he said, “Real-time means that if there are nine states where there is no network, does it mean elections will not take place there?

“Or in any part of the country where there is a grid breakdown, does it mean there will be no election?”

The Senate President sounded a note of warning to Nigerians amid outrage, saying the legislature would not be “intimidated” into passing a faulty law simply to please opposition political parties, civil society groups and non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

He criticised NGOs for insisting that because they organised retreats for lawmakers, where ideas were exchanged on the electoral bill, the Senate must adopt their positions, even if such positions did not align with the interests of all segments of the country.

“Why are people setting up panels on television stations and abusing senators? I leave them to God.

“We will not be intimidated but will do what is right for Nigeria, not what one NGO says. A retreat is not law-making.

“Why do you think that the paper you agreed to in Lagos must be what we must approve?” he asked.

Akpabio frowned at the public attacks on the Senate, saying they were uncalled for, and stressing that any provision rejected by the Senate could be reinstated by the Conference Committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives. He said there was therefore no need to hastily criticise senators.

“We have not even completed it until we look at the votes and proceedings. When we bring out the votes and proceedings, any senator has the right to rise and amend it.

“We can amend anything before we approve the votes and proceedings. Why abuse the Senate when what we have is incomplete?

“I can’t talk until they tell me to drop the gavel. In this case, we are yet to complete the process,” he said.

Besides Akpabio’s defences, many groups and individuals have risen stoutly against the removal of the real-time electronic transmission clause, describing the act as irresponsible and detrimental to the feeling of Nigerians.

In his reaction, the National Chairman of the main opposition party, African Democratic Congress (ADC) Senator David Mark, who himself, was a Senate President, and was also present at the book launch, cautioned Akpabio against speaking for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

“What the ADC is saying is: pass the law and let INEC decide whether it can implement real-time electronic transmission or not. Don’t speak for INEC.

“The position of the ADC is clear: pass the bill and let INEC decide what it will do with it,” Mark harped.

Reacting also, a former governor of Anambra State and presidential candidate of the Labour Party in the 2023 presidential election, Mr. Peter Obi, delivered knocks to the Senate for the rejection, noting that the Senate decision to stick to the 2022 Electoral Act, which concedes the discretion to apply electronic transmission of results to the Independent National Electoral Commission ( INEC), is an assault on democracy.

But beyond the brouhaha of real-time electronic transmission, other major amendments to Nigeria’s electoral calendar were approved by the Senate.

The election notice period was reduced from 360 days to 180 days, the deadline for submission of party candidate lists was shortened from 120 to 90 days, and the nomination period was cut from 180 to 90 days.

To deter electoral malpractice, the fine for unlawful possession of voters’ cards was increased from N500,000 to N5 million, though the Senate rejected a proposal for a 10-year ban on vote-buyers, opting for stiffer financial penalties instead. The smart card reader was officially removed from the electoral framework and replaced with the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS).

Under the retained provisions, presiding officers are required to count votes at the polling unit, record results on prescribed forms, announce them publicly and transmit them electronically to the appropriate collation centre.

The e-transmission of results, if approved, would have required INEC presiding officers to upload results from each polling unit to the IReV portal in real time, immediately after completing Form EC&A, which must be signed and stamped by the presiding officer and countersigned by party agents.
Instead, the senators chose to retain the present Electoral Act provision, which mandates 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.”

The Senate further upheld the provision mandating the use of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) or any other technological device prescribed by INEC for voter verification and authentication, rather than allowing alternative digital identification methods as proposed in the new bill.

With these decisions, the Senate reaffirmed the use of PVC and BVAS-based accreditation while rejecting efforts to expand digital voter identification and make electronic transmission of results compulsory.

Meanwhile, while Nigerians are planning to occupy NASS beginning from Monday, the Senate has called an emergency plenary for which the agenda is hitherto unknown, but related to votes and proceedings. It is interesting time in the Nigerian political circle now.

The bone of contention has remained ‘real-time’, and Nigerians continue to ask, ‘who is afraid of new electoral act’?