Confusion has continued to trail the Senate’s passage of the Electoral Bill 2026 following conflicting accounts over whether lawmakers approved or rejected real-time electronic transmission of election results.
Less than 24 hours after the bill was passed amid reports that the Senate voted against mandatory real-time upload of polling unit results, a group of senators moved quickly to counter the narrative, insisting that electronic transmission was never rejected—thereby widening the credibility gap over what the chamber actually decided.
At the centre of the controversy is Clause 60, particularly Section 60(3), which mandates the real-time electronic transmission of results to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) IREV portal.
During Wednesday’s clause-by-clause consideration, Senate President Godswill Akpabio ruled that Clause 60 was adopted “as amended and not as recommended.” The ruling was widely interpreted as the Senate discarding the provision for mandatory real-time transmission, sparking immediate backlash from civil society groups, opposition parties, and election observers ahead of the 2027 general elections.
By Thursday, however, thirteen senators across party lines, led by Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (PDP, Abia South), convened an emergency press briefing at the National Assembly to dispute that interpretation.
“We came out to correct a wrong impression,” Abaribe said. “The Senate did not—let me be clear—reject electronic transmission of results.”
The Clause at the Heart of the Dispute
Section 60(3) provides that:
“The Presiding Officer shall electronically transmit the results from each polling unit to the IREV portal in real time…”
Media reports following Wednesday’s plenary said the provision was voted down, with the Senate opting to retain the 2022 Electoral Act framework, which allows electronic transmission but does not compel real-time upload.
Those reports were backed by a separate Senate account of proceedings, which stated that lawmakers rejected a recommendation mandating real-time transmission, citing concerns over network challenges, logistics, and potential post-election litigation.
Abaribe, however, insisted that the Senate’s position had been misunderstood.
“What we passed is electronic transmission of results,” he said, adding that the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters and deliberations in executive session agreed on the provision.
He also noted that the legislative process on the bill is not concluded.
“We will follow this provision through harmonisation and up to presidential assent,” he said.
Pressure, Pushback, and Procedural Gaps
Also speaking, Senator Abdul Ningi (PDP, Bauchi Central) described the reports of rejection as “painful,” arguing that they unfairly portrayed the Senate as hostile to electoral reform.
“At no point did the Senate abandon electronic transmission of results,” Ningi said, blaming what he described as persistent negative narratives against the legislature.
The senators disclosed that the Votes and Proceedings from Wednesday’s sitting have yet to be formally adopted—a procedural requirement before harmonisation with the House of Representatives can begin.
Until that step is completed, they argued, the precise wording of what the Senate approved remains unsettled.
Yet contradictions persist.
The Senate President’s ruling and early official records suggest mandatory real-time upload was dropped.
The senators’ clarification insists electronic transmission—including real-time transmission—was retained.
Another Senate record explicitly states that lawmakers rejected a proposal compelling real-time upload.
The unresolved inconsistencies have sharpened scrutiny of the Senate’s internal decision-making and raised questions about whether the final Electoral Act will meet public expectations for transparent, technology-driven elections.
As harmonisation with the House approaches and presidential assent draws nearer, Nigerians are watching closely—less for clarifications and more for what eventually appears in black and white in the final law.
Electronic Transmission of Results: Senate Action Triggers Confusion, Denials, Contradictions
