Nigeria electronic transmission can enhance transparency, but experts warn political ethics and enforcement remain crucial for credible elections

Nigeria is once again locked in a familiar debate: whether the credibility of our elections
depends on the mandatory real-time electronic transmission of results to the INEC Result
Viewing (IREV) portal.

Also read: JUST IN: Senate rejects mandatory electronic result upload

The recent decision by the Senate not to approve such transmission has triggered outrage in some quarters, with technology being presented as the ultimate antidote to electoral malpractice.

This narrative, though well-intentioned, oversimplifies a far more complex reality.

Electronic transmission of results is not, and has never been, a silver bullet against rigging.
Our electoral process remains fundamentally manual.

Results are still recorded by human beings on Form EC8A at polling units before any electronic upload takes place. Where those forms are compromised, altered, or deliberately falsified, electronic transmission merely
accelerates the spread of a flawed outcome.

Recent electoral experiences illustrate this clearly. In the Edo governorship election, results
were uploaded to the IREV portal as required.

Yet public outcry followed, with allegations that several uploaded forms bore signs of alterations and mutilations. Whether these claims are ultimately upheld by the courts is beside the point.

The episode underscores a basic truth: technology can only transmit what it is given. Garbage in, garbage out.

The real challenge confronting Nigeria’s elections is not the absence of technology, but the
persistence of a political culture in which some actors are determined to win at all costs.

As long as this mindset endures, every reform—manual or electronic—will be tested, stretched,
and occasionally subverted. Technology does not eliminate bad faith; it only changes its
expression.

This is why countries with credible elections focus not only on process, but on enforcement.
Severe penalties for electoral fraud, swift prosecution of offenders, institutional
independence, and professional integrity among electoral officials matter as much as, if not
more than, the tools deployed.

That said, dismissing electronic transmission altogether would be equally misguided. While it
cannot by itself guarantee credibility, mandatory electronic transmission does improve
transparency and public confidence.

More importantly, it removes a recurring source of post- election controversy. In a polity as polarized as Nigeria’s, perceptions often matter almost as much as outcomes. Where electronic transmission is absent, it becomes an easy scapegoat for electoral losses—regardless of the actual facts.

For this reason, there is a strong argument that the National Assembly should make electronic
transmission of results mandatory, not because it is foolproof, but because it closes an
avoidable credibility gap.

It fulfils a basic expectation of openness and aligns Nigeria with global best practices, while denying perennial litigants a convenient procedural excuse ahead of the 2027 elections.

Ultimately, Nigeria’s democratic integrity will not be secured by software, portals, or real-
time uploads alone.

It will be secured when political actors accept that elections can be won and lost, when electoral officials act with courage and professionalism, and when violations attract real consequences.

As the country looks toward 2027, the task before us is not to search for perfect systems, but
to reduce avoidable weaknesses.

Mandatory electronic transmission should be adopted not as an act of blind faith in technology, but as a deliberate step to narrow the space for manipulation, suspicion, and post-election acrimony.

Electronic transmission should therefore be seen for what it is: a useful safeguard, not a magic wand.

Democracy thrives not on the illusion of flawless processes, but on the steady tightening of
safeguards and the strengthening of institutions.

Until Nigeria confronts the deeper issues of political ethics, accountability, and enforcement, every reform will remain incomplete—but refusing practical improvements only delays the progress we urgently need.