By Our Reporter
The Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, was alleged to have initially dismissed reports that the National Assembly had tampered with provisions for real-time electronic transmission of election results, describing the claims as misinformation. He reportedly insisted that the amended Electoral Act did not undermine technology in elections and urged Nigerians to ignore what he called “needless propaganda” from critics of the Senate. His denial came amid rising public suspicion that lawmakers were quietly rolling back reforms meant to strengthen electoral transparency.
Barely days later, however, Akpabio shifted position, openly defending the Senate’s decision to remove mandatory real-time transmission from the law. Speaking during the launch of a book by former senator Effiong Bob titled The Burdens of Legislators in Nigeria, the Senate President declared that real-time transmission of results “cannot work” in Nigeria’s present circumstances.
Akpabio argued that at least nine states currently lack functional mobile networks due to insecurity, making nationwide real-time transmission impossible. According to him, insisting on such a provision would mean that elections in those areas could produce no valid results. He added that even a collapse of the national grid on election day could technically invalidate the entire exercise, a scenario he said critics had failed to consider.
Blasting those opposed to the Senate’s action, Akpabio maintained that it is the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, and not the legislature, that determines how elections are conducted. He urged Nigerians to channel their grievances to the electoral body, stressing that lawmakers only create the legal framework.
The controversy has continued to spread across the country as many Nigerians view the Senate’s move as a setback to electoral reform. Civil society organisations warn that scrapping mandatory electronic transmission could open the door to manipulation, while the Senate insists it is merely being realistic. For now, Akpabio’s dramatic reversal, from denial to justification, has left the public questioning whose interest the new electoral amendments truly serve.