Barely 24 hours after the Nigerian Senate was engulfed by public outrage over reports that lawmakers had rejected electronic transmission of election results, the Senate Minority Caucus moved to douse rising tensions, insisting that the controversy was not about policy reversal but about legislative procedure, communication gaps, and public misunderstanding.
By Abdulrahman Aliagan, Abuja
Barely 24 hours after the Nigerian Senate was engulfed by public outrage over reports that lawmakers had rejected electronic transmission of election results, the Senate Minority Caucus moved to douse rising tensions, insisting that the controversy was not about policy reversal but about legislative procedure, communication gaps, and public misunderstanding.
The backlash, which erupted across social and traditional media on Wednesday, followed reports that the upper chamber had thrown out key electoral reform proposals, including real-time electronic transmission of results and tougher sanctions against electoral offenders. For many Nigerians, already sceptical of the political class, the reports reinforced long-held fears that the National Assembly was quietly rolling back hard-won electoral gains.
But by Thursday, senior opposition lawmakers sought to reframe the narrative, arguing that the Senate was not retreating from electoral transparency but struggling with the optics of complex parliamentary processes in an era of instant news cycles.
Former Senate Minority Leader, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, told journalists that the uproar reflected a deeper crisis of trust between the legislature and the public, rather than a substantive rejection of electronic result transmission.
According to him, the Senate, across party lines, maintained its commitment to electronic transmission of results as already provided for in the 2022 Electoral Act. What played out on the floor of the chamber, he said, was not a policy U-turn but procedural confusion amplified by noise, movement, and the rushed tempo of plenary proceedings.
“This is not a partisan issue. The integrity of elections is central to democracy,” Abaribe noted, stressing that both majority and minority blocs were aligned on the need for technology-driven transparency in Nigeria’s electoral process.
Sources within the National Assembly explained that the controversy highlights the often invisible stages of lawmaking that the public rarely sees. Long before the bill reached plenary, joint committees of the Senate and House of Representatives had conducted multiple retreats, consultations with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), and engagements with civil society groups. Electronic transmission of results, insiders say, emerged from those engagements as a non-negotiable reform priority.
Following committee reports, an Ad hoc Committee chaired by Senator Sadiq Umar was constituted to “tidy up” outstanding issues, including areas of conflict between the Senate and House versions of the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill. Deliberations extended into closed-door sessions, a standard but often controversial parliamentary practice that, while legal, tends to fuel public suspicion in a politically polarised environment.
What appears to have triggered the storm was the failure of the Senate to immediately adopt its Votes and Proceedings after plenary — a technical step required before the harmonisation committee can reconcile both chambers’ versions of the bill. In the absence of that formal adoption, conflicting interpretations of what was actually passed found fertile ground in a media ecosystem hungry for breaking news.
Beyond the specifics of Section 65 of the bill, the episode exposes a broader dilemma confronting Nigeria’s legislature: how to conduct complex lawmaking in a political environment shaped by real-time reporting, viral clips, and deep public distrust.
For many observers, the Senate’s attempt to retain provisions of the 2022 Electoral Act on electronic transmission raised questions about legislative clarity. While lawmakers insist they preserved electronic transmission to avoid “legal ambiguities,” critics argue that the chamber’s communication strategy remains weak, leaving room for speculation and political manipulation.
Civil society actors say the incident underlines the need for greater transparency in parliamentary communication. “In a democracy with fragile trust, perception can be as powerful as reality,” a governance advocate in Abuja told Time Nigeria Magazine. “If the public does not clearly understand what lawmakers are doing, credibility suffers — even when the substance is right.”
The Senate has assured that it will reconvene to formally adopt its Votes and Proceedings, after which the harmonisation committee will meet to reconcile differences with the House of Representatives, particularly on timelines and enforcement provisions. Only then can a unified Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill be transmitted to the President for assent.
For now, the controversy serves as a reminder that Nigeria’s democratic consolidation is not only about the content of laws, but also about how institutions communicate their intentions and processes to a politically alert — and often suspicious — public.
As the 2027 electoral cycle edges closer, the credibility of reforms such as electronic transmission of results will remain under intense public scrutiny. The Senate may have clarified its position, but rebuilding public confidence will require more than clarifications; it will demand consistency, openness, and a legislative culture that recognises that in modern Nigeria, silence and ambiguity are no longer neutral.
