The confrontation between the Nigerian populace and the leadership of the National Assembly concerning the provisions of a new Electoral Act ahead of the 2027 elections took a significant turn yesterday, as prominent activists from the Movement for Credible Elections (MCE) vocally criticized the Senate’s attempt to remove the mandatory electronic transmission of election results as proposed by the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2026.
The group subsequently urged the Senate to promptly reinstate and pass the compulsory electronic transmission of results outlined in the bill and to publicly account for those members who opposed it.
Leaders of the newly formed MCE Steering Council include Dr. Usman Bugaje, Prof. Pat Utomi, Comrade Ayuba Wabba, Dr. Oby Ezekwesili, Mr. Femi Falana, SAN, Ambassador Nkoyo Toyo, Hajia (Dr) Bilikisu Magoro, Comrade Ene Obi, Comrade Salisu Mohammed, and Comrade Bala Zakka.
This development coincided with Senate President Godswill Akpabio’s assertive statement that the National Assembly will not be intimidated regarding its decisions on the new Electoral Act.
In a statement released yesterday in Abuja by MCE Media Coordinator, Comrade James Ezema, the group described the Senate’s actions as a deliberate sabotage against the aspirations of the Nigerian people.
According to the coalition, the transmission process serves as a fundamental safeguard against result tampering, ballot rewriting, and post-election fraud.
The statement reads: “A newly launched coalition of groups of leading political activists in Nigeria, Movement for Credible Elections (MCE), categorically rejects the decision of the National Assembly via the Senate to remove and refuse the mandatory electronic transmission of election results as proposed by the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2026.
“The action of the lawmakers is seen by MCE as a direct attempt by the National Assembly to subvert the right of Nigerians to freely choose their leaders. By rejecting the mandatory transmission of election results from polling units and other critical clauses, the National Assembly has favored opacity over transparency, manipulation over credibility, and elite conspiracy over the sovereign will of the people.
“This is not lawmaking; it is deliberate democratic sabotage against the aspirations of the people of our country, as mandatory electronic transmission of results is not controversial. It is a minimal safeguard against result tampering, ballot rewriting, and post-election fraud. Any legislature that blocks it is directly defending a system that thrives on electoral corruption, stolen mandates, and fabricated elections.
“MCE therefore wishes to clarify that there is no acceptable justification for rejecting mandatory transmission except for fear of the genuine votes and mandate of the electorate.
“What this means to many who have united under the banner of this new coalition is that the status quo—where results are susceptible to manipulation between polling units and collation centers—will remain and be exploited in 2027. If we fail to provide the transparency desired by Nigerians, apathy will increase, ultimately undermining public confidence in elections, with citizens opting to express their votes in alternative ways.
“Not only has the failure of transparent election outcomes rewarded impunity and electoral fraud, but it has also enabled the courts to become instruments of mandate purchasing by the highest bidders and an extension of the executive.
“While elite state capture has become the norm in Nigeria, where impunity and oppression prevail, this anti-democratic action by the lawmakers reveals an unwillingness to engage in transparent competition in a desperate attempt to benefit from the corrupt systems ingrained since 1999.
“This decision confirms what Nigerians already understand: that the Nigerian political class fears technological transparency because it exposes their dubious and corrupt dealings during elections.
“Through this medium, we urge our numerous partners and allies not to accept any attempt to rollback the planned Occupy NASS mass protest but to mobilize and peacefully proceed with a mass civic action to defend the popular yearnings of Nigerians in resisting any effort to return Nigeria to the dark days of manual manipulation and backroom results stemming from glitches and interference with the electorate’s will.
“Again, as we gather in Lagos on Monday, 9th February, as previously scheduled to address the world about the consequences of another rigged election in Nigeria, we call on Nigerians everywhere—students, workers, traders, professionals, women, youth, community leaders, the media, and the international community—to rise, speak out, and be counted in the emergency Occupy NASS mass protests taking place in Abuja.”
Meanwhile, Senate President Akpabio stated that the Senate will not be intimidated, but will make decisions that are right for Nigerians regarding the Electoral Act that enhances democracy.
Akpabio made this remark during the public presentation of a book titled “The Burden of Legislators in Nigeria,” authored by Senator Effiong Bob at the NAF Centre, Abuja, yesterday.
He noted that the uproar concerning Section 60 (3) of the Electoral Act was unwarranted because the amendment process is still ongoing.
Akpabio remarked: “We have not passed the votes and proceedings; there is still harmonization, yet people are already on television, sitting on panels, criticizing the Senate for something that is not yet complete.
“We have not finalized it until we review the votes and proceedings. When we present the votes and proceedings, any Senator has the right to amend it.
“We can amend anything before we approve the votes and proceedings. Why criticize the Senate when what we have is incomplete?
“I cannot comment until I am instructed to drop the gavel. In this case, we have not completed the process. Why are people setting up panels on TV stations and criticizing us? I leave them to God.”
In a subtle reference to comments made on television by the Chief Executive of the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre, PLAC, Clement Nwankwo, regarding the controversy, Akpabio said: “We will not be intimidated. We will do what is right for Nigeria, not what serves one NGO. Retreats are not law-making.
“Why must the document you agree upon in Lagos be automatically approved? I want to emphasize that there is no fog or ambiguity in the insinuations.”
While describing what transpired during plenary, the Senate President stated: “All we suggested is the removal of the words ‘Real-time’ to allow INEC to decide the mode of transmission. If you mandate it and the system fails, it will lead to a catastrophe.
“The door is still open for ADC, APP, and others to make adjustments. There is a conference committee that reviews the votes and proceedings before any amendment is passed.
“Real-time means there will be no election results in nine states where there is no network or in any area of the country experiencing a grid breakdown, which means there is no election.
“Technology must support, not jeopardize, democracy. You codify real-time in law when you don’t even have electricity in your community.”
As the National Assembly finalizes amendments to the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2026 in preparation for the 2027 general elections, one of the most contentious issues remains Clause 60(3), which pertains to how election results from polling units are transmitted and reported.
Civil society organizations, political actors, and many Nigerians have advocated for amending the clause to require electronic transmission of results in real-time directly from polling units to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s Result Viewing (IReV) portal, aiming to reduce manipulation and bolster transparency.
However, during the Senate’s third reading of the bill last week, the debates were intensely focused on this issue.
After hours of discussion, senators diverged on whether to mandate real-time electronic uploads.
Some lawmakers contended that inconsistent telecommunications infrastructure across many regions could make strict real-time requirements impractical and potentially expose elections to new disputes.
Consequently, the Senate voted to reject the specific amendment language mandating real-time transmission while retaining a form of electronic transmission as already stipulated in the 2022 Act, granting INEC discretion on the precise method.
Specifically, the lawmakers deliberated on whether to enforce the electronic transmission of election results from polling units.
When Clause 60(3), which would have obliged presiding officers to upload results to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s Result Viewing (IReV) portal in real-time, was put to a vote, the Senate chose not to include that mandatory real-time requirement in the final approved version.
During plenary, Akpabio acknowledged that electronic transmission is still part of the law but stressed that the amendment maintained the existing framework, enabling transmission without imposing a strict real-time mandate, as lawmakers deemed the current provision, already present in the 2022 Act, sufficient and more practical considering Nigeria’s technical and logistical realities.
In response to widespread reports and criticisms, several senators, including members of the Minority Caucus, clarified the chamber’s position publicly.
They stated that the Senate did not “reject electronic transmission” outright, but rather explained that it opted to uphold the existing transmission mechanism and largely left the operational specifics to INEC, taking into consideration factors such as network coverage and infrastructure.
This clarification aimed to address misunderstandings regarding the legislative outcome and reassure the public that electronic transmission, as recognized under the 2022 Electoral Act, remains intact in the bill now heading for harmonization with the House of Representatives’ version.
The development has sparked significant reactions, as supporters of electoral reforms condemned the Senate’s decision as a setback for transparency and a potential loophole for manipulation, while Senate leaders defended that electronic transmission remains integral to the legal framework, albeit without the stricter real-time mandate.
Expectations are now high that the bill will proceed to a harmonization committee between the Senate and House of Representatives to reconcile differences before the final version is sent to the President for assent. This ongoing legislative process and public discourse reflect deep national concern over ensuring credible elections in 2027.
