Prioritising Manual Results Will Undermine Electoral Process, CSOs Tell Senate

Civil society organisations (CSOs) under the auspices of the Expert Round Table on Electoral Act Amendment have told the Senate that prioritising manual results will weaken electoral safeguards and erode public confidence in the electoral process.

The warning was contained in a consensus report from the Expert Round Table on Electoral Act Amendment and was presented by Prof. Sam Amadi, yesterday in Abuja.

Amadi highlighted the implications of the recent amendment to Clause 60(3) of the Electoral Act and its consequences for election credibility and democratic consolidation in Nigeria.

The expert meeting was organised as part of ongoing national efforts to strengthen Nigeria’s electoral framework and ensure that electoral reforms enhance transparency, accountability, and public confidence in democratic processes.

The Expert Round Table on Electoral Act Amendment was convened by ActionAid Nigeria, YIAGA, and the Movement for the Transformation of Nigeria.

The Round Table brought together a distinguished and multidisciplinary group of participants, including academics, civil society leaders, election administrators, legal practitioners, engineers, technology experts, and governance and public policy specialists.

The objective of this diversity of expertise was to ensure a comprehensive examination of the legal, institutional, technological, and democratic implications of the proposed amendment.

The inclusion of engineers and technology experts was particularly significant in assessing the technical feasibility, reliability, and integrity of electronic transmission systems, while election administrators and legal experts provided insights into operational realities and legal implications.

According to Prof. Amadi, the consensus report reflects the collective views, key arguments, resolutions, and recommendations arising from the deliberations and is intended to guide policymakers, legislators, electoral management bodies, civil society, and other stakeholders in strengthening Nigeria’s electoral framework and democratic future.

The report emphasised that electronic transmission protects election results from manipulation during collation and ensures transparency and accountability.

It maintained that electronic transmission using BVAS and the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) remains critical to ensuring that declared results reflect votes cast at polling units.

Participants also noted that real-time transmission enhances transparency and strengthens public confidence in elections.

He said, “Participants expressed concern that the Senate amendment may undermine electronic transmission by prioritising manual results, thereby weakening electoral safeguards and public confidence in the electoral process.

“They further emphasised that electoral reform must focus on strengthening electronic transmission, enhancing institutional independence, improving legal clarity, and addressing structural weaknesses affecting electoral integrity.

“Making manual results legally superior to electronically transmitted results creates opportunities for manipulation during manual collation, historically the weakest point in Nigeria’s electoral process.

“The amendment does not explicitly require transmission using BVAS or specify clear procedures in cases of transmission failure, thereby creating legal ambiguity and potential loopholes.

“Many provisions relating to electronic transmission are contained in INEC regulations and guidelines rather than in the Electoral Act itself, weakening their legal enforceability.

“There is also a risk of increased electoral litigation and further judicialisation of politics. Ambiguities in the amendment may increase election disputes, as conflicting interpretations between manual and electronic results could lead to prolonged litigation and judicial intervention.

“Institutional and structural challenges affecting electoral integrity remain significant. Electoral challenges in Nigeria extend beyond legal provisions to include institutional weaknesses, political interference, and insufficient bureaucratic capacity.”

He highlighted concerns including the weak independence of INEC due to executive influence in appointments, vote buying, political interference, judicialisation of electoral outcomes, weak enforcement of electoral laws, and a political culture that tolerates electoral malpractice.

He concluded that these structural challenges undermine electoral integrity and must be addressed comprehensively through institutional reforms.