By EJIRO OFOYE
Nigeria’s democracy stands today at a defining moment. While elections remain the constitutional pathway to leadership, public confidence in the electoral process has been dangerously weakened. Across the country, from major cities to rural communities, one concern has remained constant: the manipulation of election results during collation.
If Nigeria is serious about protecting the sanctity of the vote and preventing a repeat of the controversies that followed the 2023 general election, then mandatory, legally enforceable electronic transmission of election results must be entrenched in our law before 2027. This is no longer a partisan issue. It is a national democratic imperative.
A Crisis of Confidence Across Nigeria
During the 2023 elections, Nigerians openly expressed frustration and suspicion over delayed result uploads, inconsistent transmissions, and opacity in the collation process. Complaints were reported in Lagos, Abuja (FCT), Rivers, Oyo, Kaduna, Kano, Delta, Enugu, Anambra, and several other states.
In many polling units, results were announced in the presence of voters and party agents, only for different figures to surface later at collation centres. This pattern reinforced a long-held belief that the real rigging in Nigerian elections rarely occurs at the polling unit, but during the movement and aggregation of results.
The disappointment was not merely emotional. It translated into widespread litigation, public protests, voter apathy and a deepening mistrust in democratic institutions.
What the Law Currently Allows—and Why It Is Not Enough
The Electoral Act 2022 introduced electronic accreditation and provided for electronic transfer of results. However, it stopped short of clarity. The Act merely states that results shall be transmitted “in a manner as prescribed by INEC,” without clearly specifying the statutory destination of such transmission, whether transmission is mandatory, the legal status of electronically transmitted results, or the consequences of failure to transmit.
In resolving post-election disputes, the courts—including the Supreme Court—took the view that IReV is not a statutory collation centre and that failure to upload results does not, by itself, invalidate an election where physical result forms exist. This interpretation reflects the present state of the law, but it exposes a dangerous weakness: our framework still prioritises manual processes that history has repeatedly shown to be vulnerable to abuse.
The Senate’s Reversal Is Welcome—But the “Manual-When-It-Fails” Loophole Must Be Closed
It is significant that the Senate has now reversed its earlier position and moved to accommodate electronic transmission, following intense public pressure. However, reports also indicate that the new approach still permits manual collation or manual use of results where electronic transmission fails due to network/communication challenges. That “backup” may sound practical, but if the law is not carefully drafted, it becomes the very loophole through which manipulation returns—because every serious rigging plan will simply “discover” a failure at the point where transparency matters most.
Yes, Nigeria has connectivity gaps and security constraints. But the solution is not to legitimise a return to discretionary manual pathways at the critical moment. The solution is to make electronic transmission the trigger for any subsequent manual process—so that manual handling cannot begin until the electronic record exits, or until a formally documented, auditable failure process has been completed.
Why Paper Alone Is Not Protection
Paper result forms are important, but they are not sufficient in a system weakened by poor enforcement and human interference. Paper does not timestamp itself. Paper does not geotag itself. Paper does not generate audit trails. Paper can be altered, substituted, or manufactured.
Electronic transmission, when properly designed and firmly anchored in law, locks results at source—the polling unit—where transparency is highest. It does not abolish paper; rather, it strengthens it by creating a parallel, verifiable digital record that is extremely difficult to manipulate.
INEC itself has publicly acknowledged that the Electoral Act retains manual collation structures while also providing for electronic transmission—meaning the reform must deliberately remove ambiguity, not expand it.
INEC Nigeria: What Electronic Transmission Must Mean in Law
For electronic transmission to restore confidence, it must be clear, mandatory, and legally enforceable.
A reformed Electoral Act should ensure that polling-unit results are electronically transmitted directly from the polling unit to a statutory INEC central results backend (and displayed on a transparency portal), either immediately or within a clearly defined timeframe.
Each transmission should be time-stamped, geo-tagged, and digitally signed, creating an immutable audit trail—supported by basic cybersecurity controls and incident logging consistent with global election-technology risk guidance.
IFES
Failure to transmit should attract personal consequences for erring officials, without punishing voters for failures beyond their control.
The Best “Fallback” Is Not Instant Manual Collation—It Is Deferred Manual With Mandatory Digital Capture
If lawmakers genuinely want a practical safeguard for low-connectivity areas, the best practice is not “manual whenever e-transmission fails.” The best safeguard is:
Electronic-first, always. Presiding Officer must attempt upload at PU, and the system must generate a failure log if upload fails (time, location, device ID, reason code).
Digital capture is still mandatory. Even if the network fails, the PU result sheet (EC8A) should be scanned/captured on the BVAS/INEC device at the polling unit and stored with a hash (tamper-evident fingerprint).
Upload must occur at the first point of connectivity. The captured EC8A must be uploaded at the ward/LGA collation point (or any designated secure upload point) within a strict time window.
No final collation without a digital trail. Collation may proceed only when either (a) PU upload succeeds, or (b) the system shows a logged failure + the digitally captured EC8A has been uploaded at the earliest connectivity point.
Automatic red flags. Where a manual figure presented at collation differs from the later uploaded digital capture, the law should mandate automatic investigation and clear remedies.
This approach protects rural voters (by not cancelling results due to poor networks) while also preventing “network failure” from becoming a weapon of fraud.
Suggested Clause to Add to Your Write-Up (Clean Legislative Concept)
To reflect the Senate’s current direction but close the loophole, the amendment should include a clause with this effect (drafted in plain legislative style):
“Electronic transmission of polling-unit results shall be the primary and mandatory method of results delivery. Where electronic transmission from the polling unit is unsuccessful due to a verifiable communications failure, the Presiding Officer shall record and generate an electronic failure log on the Commission’s device and shall digitally capture the signed result form (EC8A) on the device at the polling unit. No collation officer shall accept or act upon a manually conveyed result for collation or declaration unless the electronic record of transmission exists, or the failure log and the digitally captured EC8A have been uploaded to the Commission’s central server at the earliest designated upload point within the time prescribed by the Commission. Any discrepancy between the uploaded digital capture and any manual entry shall trigger mandatory investigation and appropriate legal consequences.”
That single idea achieves what Nigeria needs: manual can exist only as a controlled exception—never as an escape route.
Why Reform Cannot Wait Until After 2027
Ambiguity is the enemy of credibility. Every election conducted under an unclear legal framework deepens mistrust and fuels instability. Disputed elections discourage investment, polarise communities, and weaken national cohesion.
If Nigeria approaches the 2027 general election with loopholes that undermine public confidence, the consequences may be far more severe—socially, economically, and politically.
A Call to Nigerians and Civil Society
This moment demands collective action.
We therefore call on civil society organisations, election observers, and pro-democracy groups; the Nigerian Bar Association, professional bodies, and academics; labour unions, faith-based organisations, youth and women’s groups; traditional rulers, community leaders, and the media; and all Nigerians who value democracy to speak with one voice in demanding clear amendments to the Electoral Act that make electronic transmission of election results mandatory, transparent, and legally binding—without escape clauses that return us to the very darkness we seek to escape.
This is not about supporting or opposing any political party or candidate. It is about protecting the Nigerian voter and ensuring that leadership truly reflects the will of the people.
Democracy Is About Trust
Elections are not merely about counting votes; they are about trusting the count.
Nigeria has the technology.
Nigeria has the expertise.
What remains is the political will and the legislative courage to do what is right.
The time to act is now.
•Dr. Ofoye, a public affairs analyst, wrote from Lagos
The post Electronic transmission of election results: A national imperative for credible elections in 2027 appeared first on Vanguard News.
