Why Nigeria must amend Electoral Act now, not on eve of 2027

2026-01-29 - 00:34

By Okechukwu Nwanguma Nigeria stands at a critical democratic crossroads. With the 2027 general elections approaching steadily, the lessons of the 2023 elections remain fresh, unresolved, and deeply consequential. One of the clearest lessons is this: Nigeria cannot afford to go into another election cycle with a defective, ambiguous, and weak electoral legal framework. The urgent amendment of the Electoral Act is not optional; it is imperative. The Electoral Act 2022 was widely celebrated at the time of its passage as a progressive step forward. It introduced innovations such as technological support for elections and sought to improve transparency. However, the conduct and aftermath of the 2023 general elections exposed serious shortcomings in both the law itself and its implementation. These gaps have continued to undermine public confidence in elections and democratic governance. Foremost among these shortcomings is the absence of clear, mandatory provisions for the immediate electronic transmission of election results. While the Act recognises the use of technology, it stops short of unequivocally compelling real-time electronic transmission of results from polling units. This ambiguity proved costly in 2023. It allowed discretionary interpretations, inconsistent application by electoral officials, and ultimately widespread suspicion, controversy, and contestation of election outcomes. The failure to ensure mandatory, real-time electronic transmission of results was not merely a technical oversight; it was a fundamental legal weakness. Elections thrive on certainty, predictability, and trust. Where the law leaves room for discretion in matters as critical as result transmission, the integrity of the entire electoral process is jeopardised. Disputed elections do not only produce litigation; they produce legitimacy crises that weaken democratic institutions and deepen citizens’ cynicism. Closely related to this problem is the broader issue of excessive discretion vested in INEC and its officials under the current legal framework. While discretion is necessary in administrative decision-making, the experience of the 2023 elections demonstrated how poorly defined or weakly regulated discretion can become a tool for abuse. In several instances, INEC officials invoked “discretion” to justify deviations from established guidelines, inconsistent application of procedures, and opaque decision-making that had far-reaching consequences for electoral credibility. Discretion without clear legal boundaries creates fertile ground for arbitrariness. In the Nigerian context, where institutions are often vulnerable to political pressure, weak accountability, and capacity constraints, such discretion can be easily abused. From result management, to logistical decisions and enforcement of electoral guidelines, the latitude enjoyed by electoral officials in 2023 often operated without sufficient transparency or effective checks. This undermined the principle of equality before the law and fuelled perceptions of bias, incompetence, or compromise. This is why the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill 2025 is so important. The Bill was designed specifically to address gaps identified during recent elections. Beyond strengthening provisions on electronic transmission of results, it seeks to clarify procedures, tighten sanctions for electoral offences, and improve the overall coherence of the electoral legal framework. These are not cosmetic adjustments; they go to the heart of credible, predictable, and rule-based elections. Crucially, electoral reform must deliberately limit unfettered discretion by INEC and its officials, particularly in areas that directly affect the integrity of the vote. Clear, mandatory legal standards reduce the room for subjective interpretation and selective compliance. Where discretion is unavoidable, it must be tightly circumscribed, transparent, and subject to effective oversight and accountability mechanisms. Democracy is weakened when outcomes depend more on individual judgment than on clear legal rules. Yet, despite broad acknowledgment of the need for reform, the National Assembly failed to pass the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill within the 2025 legislative year. The Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room, of which the Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC) is a member, has rightly expressed deep concern over this failure. Even more troubling is the fact that the National Assembly proceeded on an extended recess well into 2026, leaving this time-sensitive national priority unresolved. Available information indicates that while the House of Representatives concluded clause-by-clause consideration and passed the Bill at third reading before the end of 2025, the Senate suspended debate in October 2025, citing procedural errors and the need for further consultations. The Senate then adjourned without returning to the Bill. This lack of synchronised legislative action between the two chambers has stalled electoral reform at a time when urgency is paramount. Electoral reform is not a routine legislative matter that can be postponed without consequences. It is inherently time-bound. INEC is legally required to issue election notices and timetables well ahead of the polls. Without clarity on the applicable legal framework, the Commission’s ability to plan, train personnel, deploy technology, and conduct voter education is severely constrained. Delayed reforms compress timelines and increase the risk of confusion, operational failures, and disputes close to the election period. Nigeria has been here before. The Senate itself has repeatedly acknowledged that one of the reasons the 2022 Electoral Amendment Bill was not signed earlier by the Buhari administration was that the National Assembly transmitted it late to the Presidency. Repeating the same mistake ahead of 2027 would be indefensible. Laws meant to govern elections must not be passed at the last minute, when implementation becomes rushed and contentious. The prolonged recess of the National Assembly further compounds the problem. Legislative best practices in other democracies do not support extended inactivity when urgent national priorities exist. In the United Kingdom, parliamentary recess is brief and clearly structured, with Parliament resuming business early in January. In the United States, Congress is constitutionally mandated to reconvene on January 3 each year. Even within Africa, countries such as Kenya and South Africa maintain legislative calendars that allow priority bills to be addressed without drifting into paralysis. Against this backdrop, Nigeria’s prolonged legislative recess, while critical electoral reforms remain pending, sends a troubling signal. It suggests a disconnect between legislative priorities and the democratic anxieties of citizens still grappling with the credibility deficit created by the 2023 elections. It also risks reinforcing the perception that political elites are indifferent to the structural weaknesses that continue to undermine Nigeria’s democracy. The risks of continued delay are profound. Legal uncertainty weakens early preparation by INEC, undermines effective voter education, and heightens the likelihood of avoidable disputes. History shows that last-minute electoral reforms often generate confusion rather than confidence. They are more likely to be contested, poorly implemented, and politically manipulated. Electoral credibility cannot be built in haste. This is why assurances by Senate leadership that the Electoral Act amendment will be prioritised upon resumption in January 2026 must now be matched with concrete, transparent action. Nigerians deserve more than promises. They deserve certainty, clarity, and a legal framework that inspires confidence across political divides. Beyond domestic advocacy, there is also a compelling case for deliberately internationalising the push for electoral reform. Experience has shown that the Federal Government of Nigeria often responds more readily to the opinions and pressure of foreign governments and international partners than to sustained domestic calls by citizens and civil society. This is not an argument for outsourcing Nigeria’s democracy, but for amplifying Nigerian-led demands through strategic international engagement. Framed properly, the Electoral Reform Bill speaks directly to issues that international partners care deeply about: political stability, peaceful transitions, democratic credibility, and the integrity of the 2027 elections. Nigeria has benefited from significant international investments in electoral processes, governance reforms, and democratic institutions. Engaging diplomatic missions, multilateral organisations, and democracy-support institutions can help generate constructive pressure on both the executive and the legislature to act in a timely manner. Such engagement should reinforce, not replace, domestic advocacy. It should link electoral reform to Nigeria’s international commitments and underline the shared interest in preventing electoral crises that could threaten national stability. The Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room has therefore rightly called on the National Assembly to prioritise and conclude legislative action on the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill upon resumption, ensure transparent and efficient legislative procedures, and transmit the Bill to the President without delay for assent. Credible elections are the foundation of democratic governance and national stability. Nigeria cannot afford to drift into another election cycle with unresolved legal ambiguities, excessive administrative discretion, and weakened public trust. The time to act is now — not on the eve of 2027. Okechukwu Nwanguma is the Executive Director of the Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre (RULAAC) and a member of the Nigeria Civil Society Situation Room.