The House of Representatives has mounted a strong defence of the newly assented Electoral Act 2026, insisting that although the law may be “imperfect,” it was enacted in full compliance with constitutional and parliamentary procedures and reflects the collective will of the National Assembly.
The defence follows widespread criticism from opposition parties and civil society groups who argue that the amended law contains dangerous loopholes that could undermine the credibility of the 2027 general elections.
Reps: Due Process Followed
At a press briefing in Abuja, House Spokesman Akin Rotimi rejected allegations that lawmakers ignored public opinion, particularly on provisions relating to electronic transmission of results.
He maintained that the amendment process was transparent and consistent with legislative rules, stressing that the conference committee set up to harmonise differences between the House and Senate versions acted strictly within its mandate.
“For the first time, the law expressly mandates and recognises electronic transmission of results and the IReV portal. The presiding officer is required to transmit results electronically, with manual processes serving only as a fallback in cases of failure,” Rotimi said.
He explained that the final wording of the bill emerged from bipartisan compromise during conference committee deliberations, comprising members from multiple political parties across both chambers.
Addressing concerns over the speed with which the bill received presidential assent—within 24 hours of transmission to the Presidency—Rotimi argued that urgency was necessary to avoid uncertainty in the electoral calendar already announced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).
“Certainty is critical in electoral matters,” he stated, adding that the House welcomes calls for INEC to publicly test its electronic transmission system ahead of the 2027 polls.
Rotimi also described as “regrettable and unconstitutional” the reported tear-gas incident involving protesters at the National Assembly, affirming that peaceful demonstrators are constitutionally protected.
ADC Alleges Democratic Backslide
The African Democratic Congress (ADC) sharply criticised President Bola Tinubu for what it described as “alarmingly speedy” assent to the amendment despite public objections.
In a statement signed by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, the party accused the President of weakening Nigeria’s democratic credibility and introducing ambiguity into the result collation and transmission process.
The ADC vowed to mobilise Nigerians nationwide to safeguard the integrity of future elections, insisting it would deploy all constitutional and lawful means to defend democratic principles.
The party questioned why a government that commands majorities in the National Assembly and controls over 30 state governments would rush amendments to the electoral framework unless it harboured concerns about transparency in upcoming elections.
CSOs Raise Red Flags
A coalition of civil society organisations, including the Centre for Media and Society (CEMESO), The Kukah Centre, International Press Centre (IPC), Yiaga Africa, Nigerian Women Trust Fund, ElectHer, and The Albino Foundation, described the law as a “missed opportunity for transformative reform.”
The groups criticised both the content of the Act and the process leading to its passage, alleging speed, opacity, and insufficient legislative transparency. They expressed concern that the harmonised bill was adopted via voice vote without prior distribution of the final consolidated text to all lawmakers.
According to the coalition, reports that some legislators voted based on leadership assurances rather than reviewing the final text undermine parliamentary accountability.
The organisations also warned that the fallback clause under Section 63 could be exploited, potentially making manual transmission the norm instead of the exception.
They further criticised the N50 million administrative fee for political party registration, arguing that it may restrict youth participation and limit freedom of association in a fragile economy.
On party primaries, the coalition cautioned that formal recognition of consensus candidacy, even with written consent, could entrench coercion and weaken internal party democracy.
MBF: “Back to Square One”
The Middle Belt Forum (MBF) echoed similar concerns, warning that ambiguity within the law could trigger legal disputes and undermine public confidence.
MBF National President, Dr. Bitrus Pogu, argued that unresolved questions over which version of election results—electronically transmitted or manually uploaded copies—would take precedence in court create room for manipulation.
“If there is a disparity between real-time electronic transmission and uploaded paper copies, which one will prevail in court?” he asked.
Pogu insisted that technological infrastructure exists nationwide to support full electronic transmission, dismissing concerns about network coverage and urging lawmakers to clarify precedence provisions before the 2027 elections.
Growing Political Tension Ahead of 2027
With the repeal of the 2022 Electoral Act and the introduction of the 2026 amendment, the debate has intensified over whether the new framework strengthens or weakens Nigeria’s electoral system.
While lawmakers argue that the amendment enhances legal clarity and formally institutionalises electronic transmission, critics warn that ambiguity and discretionary loopholes could erode public trust in the electoral process.
As preparations begin for the 2027 general elections, the Electoral Act 2026 is already shaping up to be a defining political battleground.
Comments