Senate’s Electoral Reform Bill Risks Opening Door to Voting Errors, NBA’s Ubani Warns

By George Omagbemi Sylvester | Published by SaharaWeeklyNG

“As harmonization talks continue in Abuja, legal experts and civil society leaders warn that ambiguities in the Senate’s draft amendment could undermine electronic result transmission and weaken public confidence ahead of the 2027 general elections.”

Abuja, Nigeria – The ongoing controversy over the Electoral Act 2022 (Repeal & Enactment) Amendment Bill, 2026 has erupted into one of the most consequential political flashpoints in Nigeria’s democratic journey ahead of the 2027 general elections. At the centre of the storm is the Senate’s version of the bill, which critics (including Monday Ubani, SAN, Chairman of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) Electoral Reform Committee) say leaves open critical loopholes that could invite systematic electoral errors and manipulation.

On Saturday, Ubani raised pointed concerns during a televised interview on Arise Television, arguing that the Senate’s draft, as passed on second reading, “leaves room for electoral error”. He explained that electronic result transmission and result transfer processes in the bill still rely on manual collation at collation centres, leaving the possibility for discrepancies between what voters see at the polling unit and what is declared later.

“The people have witnessed a situation where a different result will be declared at the collation centre, different from what happened at the polling unit,” Ubani said. “The Senate proposed bill leaves room for electoral error and there are concerns about communication failures that can be illegally taken advantage of.”

The uproar stems from the Senate’s decision not to include language that mandates real‑time electronic transmission of election results from polling units with a reform widely championed by civil society, legal experts, opposition parties and advocacy groups. Instead, the Senate retained a provision that allows the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) discretion in determining the mode of results transfer, similar to what existed under the Electoral Act 2022.

For decades, Nigeria’s elections have been plagued by allegations of manipulation and result tampering, particularly during the transportation and collation of results away from polling units. In the 2023 general elections, electronic tools like the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) were deployed to upload results online, allowing citizens to view them in real time. However, the Supreme Court later ruled that such electronic transmission lacked a statutory basis, since the Electoral Act did not expressly mandate its use.

This legal lacuna has invigorated reform advocates to push for legislative clarity. As one election law expert told TheCable in an in‑depth legal analysis, “the absence of ‘real‑time’ language, the undefined communication failure exception, and the designation of manual results as primary when technology allegedly fails transform what should be a strong transparency mechanism into a discretionary system vulnerable to abuse.”

Yet, rather than enshrining real‑time electronic transmission as a legal requirement, the Senate retained the existing discretionary framework, prompting outrage. Civil society organisation #FixPolitics Africa argued that this amounts to a “brazen betrayal of electoral reform and the rule of law,” stating that ambiguities in the bill erode public trust and risk hollowing out Nigeria’s democracy.

Prominent voices have weighed into the debate. Former Minister of Education and activist Oby Ezekwesili warned that the Senate’s approach amounts to “playing with fire” ahead of elections that Nigerians hope will be more credible than past cycles. Critics argue that removing mandatory electronic transmission and retaining discretionary language hands back power to old practices that have facilitated manipulation.

On the political front, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) condemned the Senate’s decision as “most shameful and unfortunate,” stressing that the majority of Nigerians want electoral sanctity bolstered through electronic safeguards. The party’s statement argued that without clear legal requirements, result manipulation remains possible.

Yet Senate leaders have downplayed the criticism. Senate President Godswill Akpabio stressed that the process is not complete, noting that the Senate will reconvene to approve the Votes and Proceedings of its sessions before the final text is settled. He cautioned against premature judgments, characterising public outrage as misguided given that legislative harmonisation with the House of Representatives is still underway.

Senators like Ireti Kingibe have also sought to reassure the public. Kingibe, a member of the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters, said the core reforms (including electronic transmission) remain part of the discussions and will be clarified in a harmonised version of the bill.

As a harmonisation committee meets to reconcile the Senate and House versions, the stakes could scarcely be higher. If the differences are not resolved clearly and transparently, the final Electoral Act may lack the very reforms most Nigerians believe are necessary to restore confidence in the electoral process.

Legal scholar Dr. Emeka Umeagbalasi, writing in a recent analysis, captured the moment perfectly: “Nigerians invested in technology and raised expectations about transparency, but the legal framework must now match that investment and failing to enshrine real‑time transmission risks a repeat of the very irregularities reformers sought to eliminate.”

The 2027 elections loom large on the calendar. With trust in democratic institutions fragile and public impatience with political elite promises at an all‑time high, the final form of Nigeria’s electoral law may prove as decisive as any campaign rhetoric or political rally. The tension between tradition and technology, discretion and certainty, could well determine whether the next general elections are a triumph of democracy or another missed opportunity.