Senate Won’t Succumb to Critics over Electoral Act Amendment, Says Akpabio

Senate President, Godswill Akpabio has defended the Senate’s ongoing amendment of the Electoral Act, faulting critics for what he described as premature judgment of an incomplete legislative process.

Akpabio insisted that the Senate had not removed provisions for electronic transmission of election results, clarifying that lawmakers only questioned the requirement for mandatory real-time transmission.

The Senate President spoke in Abuja as the special guest of honour at the unveiling of a book titled The Burden of Legislators in Nigeria, authored by Senator Effiong Bob.

His comments followed growing criticism from opposition parties, civil society organisations and professional bodies over reports that the Senate had rejected mandatory real-time electronic transmission of election results in the proposed amendment to the Electoral Act.

On Saturday, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) called on the Senate to ensure that the amended Act explicitly provides for mandatory electronic transmission of results.

In a statement shared on X (formerly Twitter), the NBA criticised the Senate’s decision to retain the current wording of the law allowing results to be transmitted “in a manner as prescribed by the Commission” arguing that it weakened the legal framework for transparent elections and created room for ambiguity and manipulation.

Responding to the criticisms, Akpabio said public debate on the issue was premature, stressing that the Senate had not concluded work on the bill.

“The Electoral Act amendment is incomplete. We have not completed it, but they are already on television. They don’t understand lawmaking,” he said.

He explained that legislative work only becomes final after it is reflected in the Senate’s Votes and Proceedings, noting that deliberations were still ongoing.

“They don’t even know that what is in the Senate is not completed until we look at the Votes and Proceedings,” he added.

The Senate President also criticised some civil society groups and commentators for what he described as an attempt to impose their views on lawmakers, accusing them of overstepping their role.

“People have become mouth legislators. Go and contest election if you want to talk about lawmaking and go and join them and make the law. Retreats are not lawmaking; retreats are part of consultations,” he said.

Akpabio further dismissed claims that the Senate had removed electronic transmission entirely, insisting that all modes of result transmission remain permissible under the proposed amendment.

“I must state clearly, without ambiguity, that the Senate has not removed any means of transmission. If you want to use a bicycle to carry your votes from one polling unit to the ward centre, do so. If you want to use your phone to transmit, do so. If you want to use your iPad, do so,” he said.

According to the former Akwa Ibom State governor, the Senate’s main concern was that mandating real-time transmission could expose elections to legal challenges in the event of network failures or power outages.

“All we said was that we should remove the word ‘real time,’ because if you say real time and there is a grid failure and the network is not working, when you go to court, somebody will say it ought to have been real time,” Akpabio explained.

He argued that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) should be allowed to determine the most appropriate mode and timing for transmitting election results within the framework of the law.

The Senate President warned that rigidly insisting on real-time transmission could invalidate results in areas affected by poor connectivity or insecurity.

“Real time means that in over nine states where networks are not working because of insecurity, there will be no election results. Nationally, if the national grid collapses and no network is working, no election results will be valid,” he said.

Akpabio maintained that electoral reforms must be grounded in Nigeria’s legal, technological and institutional realities, cautioning against imposing technological requirements that exceed existing infrastructure.

He added that persistent mistrust of institutions without adequate understanding of legislative processes could undermine democratic governance.

“When people do not understand their legislature, democracy is at risk. Democracy is measured not by passion alone, but by principles,” he said.