THE SENATE AND THE ELECTORAL ACT

Nigerians expected bold reforms that would finally protect their votes in 2027. Instead, the Senate has delivered a cynical betrayal—one that raises a troubling question: does the Nigerian Senate genuinely want credible elections, or is it deliberately laying the groundwork for a  stolen mandate?

By rejecting mandatory real-time electronic transmission of results, the Senate has all but confirmed public fears. This is not reform. This is regression dressed up as legislation. Nigerians are no longer merely skeptical; they are alarmed. The Senate’s actions suggest a calculated effort to preserve the dark corners of the electoral process where manipulation thrives

The outrage that followed the Senate’s handling of the Electoral Act amendments is justified. Civil society groups, election observers, and opposition stakeholders have rightly condemned what can only be described as a deliberate weakening of the Electoral Act 2022. Blocking real-time electronic transmission of results is an open invitation to rigging, a direct assault on transparency, and a slap in the face of voters who endured flawed elections in the past.

Let us be clear: there is no credible argument against electronic transmission of results. Nigeria’s electoral disasters have never occurred at polling units; they occur during collation and transmission—where figures are altered, results rewritten, and mandates stolen. By retaining ambiguity around electronic transmission, the Senate has chosen to protect manipulation rather than democracy.

Section 60(3) of the Electoral Bill 2026 clearly states that presiding officers shall electronically transmit polling unit results to INEC’s IREV portal in real time after signing Form EC8A. This provision was meant to close the door on result tampering. Yet, during plenary, the Senate effectively gutted it, opting instead to fall back on the weaker 2022 framework that allows—but does not compel—real-time transmission.

This decision was not accidental. It was strategic. Stakeholders have described this move for what it is: a deliberate attempt to legitimize manual collation and create space for post-election manipulation. The Senate’s posture signals a dangerous indifference to the survival of Nigeria’s democracy beyond 2027. Rigged elections do not merely produce bad leaders; they breed anger, instability, and democratic collapse.

Senate President Godswill Akpabio’s declaration that Clause 60 was adopted “as amended and not as recommended” was widely interpreted—correctly—as the burial of mandatory real-time electronic transmission. That ruling alone extinguished what little hope many Nigerians still had for credible elections in 2027.

Even attempts by Senator Abdul Ningi to downplay the damage ring hollow. Whether by intent or incompetence, the outcome remains the same: a weakened law that empowers electoral abuse. Legislative semantics cannot erase the real-world consequences of this decision.

As if undermining electronic transmission were not enough, the Senate also proposed scrapping the 10-year disqualification for vote buying. This is nothing short of absurd. In an electoral environment awash with money politics, reducing sanctions amounts to legalizing corruption. A ₦5 million fine—loose change to political godfathers—is not punishment; it is permission. Nevertheless the lowering the cost of electoral malpractice effectively normalises corruption. A penalty of this scale is not a deterrent; it is a fee.

Then comes the reckless proposal to slash the Notice of Election period from 360 days to 180 days. Nigerians have already lived through the chaos of compressed timelines: delayed materials, poor logistics, disenfranchised voters. To resurrect a failed model is not oversight—it is sabotage. These provisions do not strengthen democracy. They weaken it systematically and intentionally.

Abba Dukawa, Abuja abbahydukawa@gmail.com