Senators Accuse Akpabio of Altering Senate Record on Electronic Transmission of Election Results

A group of senators has accused Senate President Godswill Akpabio of altering the official record of Wednesday’s proceedings to remove the Senate’s support for electronic transmission of election results from the Electoral Act amendment bill.

The lawmakers — led by Enyinnaya Abaribe, Aminu Tambuwal, and Natasha Akpoti — made the allegation during a press conference on Thursday, insisting that the Senate had, in fact, agreed to retain electronic transmission of results as provided under Section 60(3) of the Electoral Act, 2022.

Their reaction followed the Senate’s announcement on Wednesday that it had passed the Electoral Act, 2022 (Repeal and Re-enactment) Bill, 2026, while rejecting an amendment that sought to make electronic transmission of election results compulsory.

Addressing journalists, Mr Abaribe said the senators felt compelled to clarify what transpired during plenary and in subsequent sessions.

“To put the records straight, the Senate did not pass what is now being described as ‘transfer of results,’ which is what is being reported. What we passed — and which the Senate President himself acknowledged while presiding — is transmission of results.”

He stressed that the issue was not semantic but legal, arguing that the difference between “transfer” and “transmission” could determine how the law is interpreted and implemented by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

“I can assure you, on my honour and on the honour of all of us here, that both the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters, the ad-hoc committee of the Senate, and even in the executive session we held, we all agreed on Section 60(3), which is electronic transmission of results. Transmit, not transfer.”

Mr Abaribe said the 2022 Electoral Act already provided for electronic transmission and that senators were deliberate in ensuring the provision remained clear and unambiguous in the new bill.

“What is in the 2022 Act is transfer, and we don’t want a law that is vague or open to misinterpretation. We want a law that is clear, concise, and can be interpreted by all. It must be unambiguous. So, it is electronic transmission of results.”

According to the senators, the understanding reached during deliberations was that the provision for electronic transmission would be retained, and that this consensus was reflected in discussions at both committee level and during an executive session.

However, in its official summary after plenary on Wednesday, the Senate stated that it had rejected the amendment seeking to make electronic transmission mandatory. Instead, it said it retained the 2022 framework, which requires results to be manually completed, signed, stamped, and distributed to party agents and security personnel at polling units.

The Senate’s position, as announced, is that results should be announced at polling units and “transferred” in a manner prescribed by INEC, without mandating electronic transmission.

The senators at Thursday’s briefing said this summary did not reflect what was agreed on the floor.

They also addressed other decisions taken during consideration of the bill. The Senate rejected Clause 47, which proposed allowing electronically generated voter identification — such as downloadable voter cards with QR codes — to be used for accreditation.

As a result, the requirement for voters to present a physical Permanent Voter Card (PVC) remains in place. The use of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), or any other device prescribed by INEC for verification, was also upheld.

For the lawmakers who spoke, the central concern remains what they describe as a discrepancy between what was agreed during deliberations and what was presented as the Senate’s final position.

“This is not about politics,” Mr Abaribe said. “It is about ensuring that the law we pass is clear and cannot be twisted. Nigerians deserve to know exactly what their electoral law says, andwhat the Senate actually passed.”