A heated exchange erupted on live television Thursday as prominent ARISE News anchors, Reuben Abati and Rufai Oseni, disagreed sharply over the newly amended Electoral Act and its implications for Nigeria’s democracy.
The controversy follows the recent passage of the Electoral Amendment Bill by both chambers of the National Assembly. The legislation makes electronic transmission of election results mandatory while retaining manual collation as a backup. President Bola Tinubu signed the Electoral Act, 2022 (Repeal and Re-Enactment) Bill 2026 into law less than 24 hours after its approval by lawmakers.
The speed of its passage and presidential assent has since generated widespread debate across political and civic circles.
During the broadcast, Oseni raised concerns about the independence of the legislature, arguing that the National Assembly failed to exercise effective oversight.
“They passed the law to make it mandatory for electronic transmission. Once you have two arms that are supposed to be separated and the Senate President is said to be loyal to the President, then it’s a problem for Nigeria because we can’t get effective representation,” he said.
Oseni further questioned whether the Senate was acting in the broader interest of Nigerians, suggesting that party loyalty may be undermining democratic accountability. “This is a democracy, not an authoritarian or military government,” he added.
Abati, however, countered the argument by defending party cohesion within democratic systems. Drawing a comparison with the United States, he noted that party alignment between the executive and legislature is not unusual in presidential systems.
“Even in the United States, party members often align with their platform. There is a minority opposition that provides balance,” Abati said. He added that it would be unrealistic to expect the Senate President to oppose the leader of his own party.
The on-air debate underscores growing public scrutiny surrounding the amended electoral framework and its potential impact on transparency, party politics, and institutional independence ahead of future elections.
Comments