By Nathaniel Zaccheus, Abuja
Nigeria’s push to reform its electoral framework slid deeper into controversy yesterday as major opposition political parties accused the Senate of endangering democracy by failing to expressly mandate real-time electronic transmission of election results, while a bloc of senators countered that the uproar was based on misunderstanding and an incomplete legislative process.
In a strongly worded joint statement, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), African Democratic Congress (ADC) and New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) said the Senate’s handling of the Electoral Act (Repeal and Enactment) Bill, 2026, had fallen far short of the expectations of millions of Nigerians who demanded ironclad safeguards against electoral manipulation.
The opposition parties warned that democracy itself was “on the brink,” arguing that the refusal to unambiguously compel presiding officers to upload polling unit results in real time amounted to a deliberate preservation of loopholes that had previously undermined public trust in elections.
They described the development as a “betrayal of public trust” and an attempt by the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to roll back democratic gains under the guise of legislative reform.
At the centre of the dispute is the Senate’s decision to retain Section 60 of the Electoral Act 2022, which permits electronic transmission of results “in a manner as prescribed by the Commission,” rather than adopting a proposal that would have made real-time electronic upload mandatory.
According to the opposition parties, the Senate’s position contradicts the lessons of the 2023 general elections and ignores widespread public calls for clarity following prolonged legal battles over results transmission.
“The grave implications of this retrogressive act by the Senate have compelled us to jointly address an issue capable of derailing our hard-earned democracy,” the parties said, accusing the APC-led Senate of acting out of fear of losing elections conducted under a fully transparent system.
They questioned why a ruling party that relies heavily on digital platforms for its internal operations, including nationwide electronic membership registration, would resist deploying similar technology to guarantee credible elections.
“We are at a loss as to why a party that uses technology to organise itself is averse to using technology to transmit election results,” the statement said, adding that the Senate’s posture appeared designed to shield weaknesses in the electoral system.
The opposition further cited the Supreme Court’s October 2023 judgment, which held that electronic transmission of results was not mandatory under the 2022 Act and that INEC’s Result Viewing (IReV) portal lacked legal status as a collation platform.
They argued that the ruling, which played a key role in upholding President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s election, exposed a legislative gap that the current amendment process ought to have decisively closed.
“Those judgments clearly signalled the need for explicit legislative parentage for electronic transmission,” the parties said, warning that leaving the matter to INEC’s discretion undermines transparency and public confidence.
They urged the conference committee tasked with harmonising the Senate and House of Representatives’ versions of the bill to adopt the House position, which mandates real-time upload of results, cautioning that laws perceived as anti-democratic could threaten national stability.
However, amid the swelling criticism, a group of senators from different political parties insisted that claims of a Senate rejection of real-time electronic transmission were misleading.
Led by former Minority Leader, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, the lawmakers argued that the Senate did not, in intent or substance, abandon electronic transmission and that the controversy stemmed from procedural issues and semantic confusion.
Abaribe told journalists that the Senate’s Votes and Proceedings — the authoritative legal record of what was passed, had yet to be adopted, insisting that reports suggesting a reversal of electronic transmission were premature.
He said, “The Senate did not, I repeat, not reverse electronic transmission. What we passed is electronic transmission of election results, including real-time transmission. The process is not finished.”
According to the senators, confusion arose during clause-by-clause consideration when a specific proposal compelling real-time upload to IReV was defeated, even though a broader consensus on electronic transmission was allegedly reaffirmed during a closed-door executive session convened to resolve contentious issues.
They also pointed to the long-standing ambiguity between the terms “transfer” and “transmission” in electoral law, an ambiguity many Nigerians expected the amendment to finally resolve.
“Transparent elections are the foundation of democracy. This is not a party matter; it is a Nigerian matter,” he said.
Tensions escalated further following protests over the initial composition of the conference committee, prompting Senate President Godswill Akpabio to revise the list and appoint Senator Adeniyi Adegbomire as chairman.
Akpabio maintained that retaining the 2022 provision still preserves electronic transmission in law, a stance critics insist falls short of the explicit mandate Nigerians demanded.
**Beyond results transmission, the Senate approved several other amendments, including reducing the election notice period from 360 to 180 days, shortening deadlines for submission of candidates’ lists, formally replacing the card reader with BVAS, increasing penalties for vote-buying, and mandating rerun elections where winners are disqualified for fraud.
Yet, for opposition parties and civil society groups, the absence of a clear legal command for real-time results upload remains the defining issue.
As deliberations move to the conference committee, the fate of that provision is increasingly viewed as a decisive test of the credibility of Nigeria’s future elections, and of the Senate’s commitment to genuine democratic reform.
