Nigeria’s push to modernise elections through technology has hit another political roadblock after the Senate rejected a proposal that would mandate real-time electronic transmission of election results—particularly the idea of forcing uploads to INEC’s Result Viewing Portal (IReV). The decision came during deliberations on amendments to Nigeria’s election law, where lawmakers retained provisions that allow technology use, but stopped short of making real-time e-transmission compulsory.
What “real-time e-transmission” is really about
In simple terms, real-time e-transmission means sending polling unit results electronically immediately after counting, typically by uploading scanned result sheets (and/or data) from each polling unit to a central platform that citizens, parties, and observers can view. The promise is straightforward: reduce human interference during collation, limit result “rewriting,” and boost trust because everyone can compare what was counted at the polling unit with what is declared later.
Nigeria’s current legal framework already recognises electronic result management. INEC itself has explained that under the Electoral Act 2022, the process remains largely manual (results recorded on forms and physically moved for collation) but the law also provides for electronic transmission of results, depending on INEC’s determination and practical constraints.
What the Senate rejected—and what it didn’t
The Senate’s latest position is not necessarily “no technology.” It is no mandatory real-time upload requirement (especially to IReV), which many Nigerians see as the clearest transparency lever. Reports on the debate indicate lawmakers rejected language that would compel real-time electronic transmission, even as reforms were considered in other areas of the bill.
Public reaction: “Why block the one thing that builds trust?”
Public sentiment has been sharply critical, particularly among civil society voices, youth voters, and transparency advocates who argue that real-time publishing makes manipulation harder and disputes easier to resolve. The backlash is also rooted in lived experience: Nigerians have repeatedly watched elections descend into legal battles and public distrust when the chain from polling unit to final collation appears opaque.
Some stakeholders have also argued that mandatory real-time e-transmission may not augur well for voters in areas with poor or unreliable network coverage, particularly in rural and hard-to-reach communities. According to this view, enforcing instant electronic uploads could unintentionally disadvantage polling units where mobile broadband is weak or unavailable, creating delays, disputes, or even the risk that valid votes are excluded or questioned.
Proponents of this argument say Nigeria’s digital divide remains significant and that election integrity should not depend solely on connectivity conditions that vary widely across the country. They contend that until network infrastructure is more evenly distributed, electoral laws should allow flexibility—combining manual result collation with technology as a support tool—rather than imposing strict real-time requirements that may penalise voters simply because of where they live.
Senate President’s response
Senate President Godswill Akpabio has been quoted in reports framing the decision as rejecting “mandatory” transmission—not banning uploads entirely—suggesting that result upload can still be allowed under existing provisions.
This mirrors an earlier Senate argument made in 2021 under then–Senate President Ahmad Lawan: that blanket e-transmission requirements could disenfranchise voters in areas with limited connectivity, hence the preference for conditional rules.
How this affected the last general elections
The 2023 general elections are the clearest “test case” for why real-time transmission became such a major public demand. INEC introduced BVAS and promised improved transparency through IReV, raising expectations that polling unit results would be viewable quickly. But during the presidential election, IReV suffered a major failure that prevented many Nigerians from viewing results in real time—fueling suspicion, protests, and court challenges.
That breakdown became a defining controversy of 2023: even where voting happened, trust suffered because the transparency layer did not perform as expected.
What happens in developed democracies
In many developed democracies, results are typically transmitted rapidly using secure digital reporting systems, but almost always backed by strong audit trails—paper ballots, signed polling-station results, recount procedures, and transparent public reporting. The key difference is less about “technology vs no technology” and more about verifiable transparency: the public can trace results from local units to national totals through clear documentation and established auditing.
The bottom line
Nigeria’s debate is not just technical—it’s about legitimacy. After 2023, many citizens view real-time transmission (and public visibility of polling unit results) as a minimum trust requirement. By rejecting a mandatory approach, the Senate has reopened a familiar tension: connectivity and practicality vs transparency and public confidence—with 2027 already on the horizon.
