In a troubling turn of events, the leadership of the National Assembly has effectively dismantled nearly two years of painstaking work undertaken by its Joint Committees on Electoral Matters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On 13 February 2024, the Senate and House Committees on Electoral Matters held their first joint public engagement – a retreat in Lagos convened with support from the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC). That retreat marked the formal commencement of a reform process intended to address the widely acknowledged shortcomings of Nigeria\u2019s 2023 General Elections and to lay a credible legal foundation for the 2027 polls.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
At that\nretreat and in subsequent consultations, the Joint Committees committed to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The\nreform process was deliberate, consultative, and technically grounded. It\ninspired public confidence that Nigeria was on course to enact a more credible\nand future-ready electoral framework.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
That\npromise has now been severely undermined.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Following\ninternal alterations by the Senate and the rapid assent by President Bola Ahmed\nTinubu, what has emerged is a significantly altered version of the Joint\nCommittee Bill\u2014one that departs materially from the consensus reached after\nmonths of technical deliberations and public consultation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What the Joint Committees Originally Proposed<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nJoint Committee Bill contained several progressive and reform-oriented\nprovisions, including:<\/p>\n\n\n\n 1. Legal Backing for Electronic Transmission of Results<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Amendment\nto Section 60(3)<\/strong> to expressly provide for the use of BVAS to\ntransmit electronic copies of polling unit results to INEC\u2019s legally recognized\nResult Viewing Portal (IReV). 2. Clear Framework for Party Primaries<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Retention of both direct\nand indirect primaries<\/strong>, while allowing either process to produce a\nconsensus candidate. 3. Extended Notice of Election Timeline<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n A 360-day\nnotice period<\/strong> to enable INEC undertake procurement, logistics\nplanning, training, and voter education well ahead of elections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n 4. Judicial Efficiency and Cost Reduction<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n An innovative provision empowering courts to return the lawful runner-up as winner where a declared winner is found constitutionally disqualified- thereby reducing costly and disruptive re-run elections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n These\nproposals reflected lessons from 2023 and aligned with stakeholder demands for\nclarity, predictability, and transparency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What Changed<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nSenate leadership introduced substantial alterations that diluted key reform\nprovisions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Electronic Transmission Weakened<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nclear obligation to transmit polling unit results electronically was qualified\nby a broad proviso allowing abandonment of electronic transmission in cases of\n\u201cnetwork failure.\u201d Party Primaries Altered<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The\noption of indirect primaries was deleted, and the framework for direct\nprimaries was weakened, leaving procedural ambiguity in candidate selection\nprocesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Notice of Election Reduced<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The 360-day notice period was shortened to 300 days, reportedly on grounds relating to religious considerations – an argument without precedent in Nigeria\u2019s electoral history and one that risks complicating INEC\u2019s operational planning.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Cost-Saving Judicial Reform Removed<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nprovision empowering courts to return the lawful runner-up was deleted,\nrestoring the likelihood of expensive and destabilising re-run elections.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Institutional Implications<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The\nJoint Committees conducted nationwide consultations, engaged technical experts,\nand produced a Bill widely regarded as responsive to citizens\u2019 expectations.\nThe House of Representatives passed that version in December 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n However, the Senate\u2019s subsequent alterations – followed by swift presidential assent – have raised significant concerns about legislative coherence, institutional respect for committee processes, and adherence to consultative reform principles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The speed with which assent was granted – reportedly within hours of passage – has further fueled public debate about the motivations behind the amendments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n At stake is not merely the content of an Electoral Act, but the credibility of Nigeria\u2019s law-making process. When a legislature disowns the product of its own joint committee – after extensive public engagement – it risks weakening public trust in both electoral reform and parliamentary procedure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Electoral\nreform is not a partisan exercise; it is a constitutional responsibility. The\n2027 General Elections demand clarity, certainty, and public confidence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The\ndismantling of core elements of the Joint Committee Bill represents a missed\nopportunity to consolidate lessons from 2023 and strengthen Nigeria\u2019s\ndemocratic architecture.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As\nNigeria approaches another electoral cycle, sustained vigilance from citizens,\ncivil society, and institutional actors will be necessary to ensure that the\nspirit of reform is not permanently subordinated to expediency.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" In a troubling turn of events, the leadership of the National Assembly has effectively dismantled nearly two years of painstaking work undertaken by its Joint Committees on Electoral Matters. On 13 February 2024, the Senate and House Committees on Electoral Matters held their first joint public engagement – a retreat in Lagos convened with support […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":3917,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3980","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3980","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3980"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3980\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3984,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3980\/revisions\/3984"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3917"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3980"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3980"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/placng.org\/Legist\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3980"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
\nThis was intended to cure ambiguities exposed in post-election litigation and\nstrengthen transparency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nThis preserved flexibility for political parties while maintaining structured\nprocedural safeguards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\nThis effectively reintroduces uncertainty and creates a loophole capable of\nundermining transparency.<\/p>\n\n\n\n