Why Nigerians Should Accept National Assembly’s Stance On Election Result Transmission BY DR IJEOMAH ARODIOGBU

Why Nigerians Should Accept National Assembly’s Stance On Election Result Transmission

BY DR IJEOMAH ARODIOGBU

Nigerians, largely from the opposition, should stop treating the National Assembly’s position on electronic transmission of election results as some catastrophic betrayal of democratic ideals.

The legislature chose not to enforce mandatory, real-time, exclusive digital upload of polling unit outcomes nationwide, allowing instead for a flexible setup where INEC can use electronic means when conditions permit but fall back on manual collation if networks fail or other issues arise. This is not sabotage; it is a deliberate effort to keep the process workable and inclusive in a nation where digital readiness varies dramatically from one region to another.

The core problem with pushing absolute dependence on e-transmission lies in Nigeria’s current realities. Internet access remains spotty or non-existent in many rural and semi-urban locations. Mobile networks, even with expansions from providers, drop calls and data in remote villages, hilly terrains, or during peak usage times.

Forcing presiding officers to rely solely on uploading scans or data packets to a central portal assumes perfect connectivity, which simply does not exist uniformly. When that assumption crumbles, as it inevitably would in thousands of units, the entire exercise risks stalling, leading to disputed collations, delayed announcements, or outright disenfranchisement of voters who queued for hours only to see their votes trapped in limbo.

Beyond connectivity, cybersecurity presents another serious hurdle. Election data transmitted digitally becomes a prime target for interference, whether from domestic actors seeking advantage or foreign entities probing weaknesses. A compromised server, manipulated upload, or denial-of-service attack could cast shadows over millions of votes, far outweighing the transparency gains hoped for. Physical handling of result sheets, with party agents witnessing counts and sign-offs at the unit level, offers tangible checks that digital streams alone cannot always replicate when systems glitch or get breached. The Assembly’s approach preserves these human layers while permitting tech enhancements where they function reliably.

Look at how the world’s leading democracy handles this. In the United States, no overarching federal legislation demands that every election result be transmitted electronically in real time or as the sole method. Authority rests largely with individual states, which adopt diverse procedures suited to their populations, geography, and resources. Some jurisdictions send preliminary tallies digitally for speed, but official certification often involves paper-based canvassing boards reviewing physical records. This decentralised model avoids the pitfalls of a blanket national mandate that might ignore local disparities, such as remote rural counties lacking broadband or urban centres facing overload. It prioritises verifiable outcomes over speed alone, ensuring disputes can be resolved through audits of tangible evidence rather than contested digital logs.

A technologist of global stature has echoed similar reservations about leaning too heavily on electronic systems for voting integrity. Elon Musk, who heads companies pioneering satellite broadband and advanced computing, has publicly stated that electronic voting machines should be eliminated because the hacking risk, even if low, remains unacceptable in such a high-stakes arena. He has argued that computer programs are inherently vulnerable to subtle alterations or exploits, making them unsuitable as the primary trust mechanism. Musk advocates returning to basics like paper ballots that create clear, auditable trails resistant to remote tampering. His viewpoint carries weight precisely because it comes from someone who designs and deploys intricate digital infrastructures yet recognises their limits in contexts demanding absolute certainty and public confidence.

A significant portion of the noise around this legislative choice originates from politicians who sense vulnerability in upcoming contests. Facing weak organisational footprints or eroding popularity, they amplify the issue into an existential threat to fairness, framing non-mandatory transmission as deliberate rigging machinery. This tactic shifts focus from their own shortcomings, such as failure to build enduring local structures or engage communities consistently, toward attacking the framework itself. By stoking fears of manipulation through manual elements, they hope to pre-empt accountability for poor performance at the polls.

Voters should see past these distractions and commit to thorough self-education.

Examine the actual text of the amended provisions, which retain electronic options but add provisions for fallback when transmission fails due to communication breakdowns. Study INEC’s past deployments, where biometric accreditation has reduced multiple voting and result uploads have occurred successfully in many units despite challenges. Compare Nigeria’s context with other large federations that blend methods rather than enforce uniformity. This kind of diligent inquiry cuts through sensational claims and equips citizens to engage meaningfully rather than react emotionally.

Political organisations that maintain a solid, widespread presence rarely demand unfeasible tech absolutes. Those with dedicated agents in every ward, active youth and women’s wings, regular town halls, and a history of sustained voter outreach understand that wins come from turnout and trust built over time. They invest in training observers, monitoring logistics, and fostering partnerships across divides. Insisting on a nationwide digital mandate that current infrastructure cannot sustain suggests a lack of confidence in those fundamentals, as if the only path to victory lies in forcing a system prone to breakdowns that can then be blamed for losses.

The wiser course involves gradual integration of technology. Expand reliable network coverage through partnerships, invest in backup power solutions for polling sites, strengthen INEC’s cybersecurity protocols, and continue piloting digital tools in conducive environments. Retain the flexibility to use physical collation where needed, ensuring no voter is side-lined by technical failures. This hybrid path builds resilience, allows learning from each cycle, and maintains public faith by avoiding overpromises on flawless connectivity. Public discourse would benefit enormously from shifting emphasis away from this single clause toward broader electoral health. Address voter registration gaps, enhance security for officials and materials, and promote civic education on rights and responsibilities. These foundational improvements yield far greater returns than fixating on transmission methods that, in practice, serve as one piece of a much larger puzzle.

The Assembly’s decision reflects awareness of these complexities rather than indifference to transparency. It safeguards against scenarios where ambitious digital requirements collapse under real-world pressures, potentially eroding trust more severely than incremental progress. Nigerians deserve elections that are secure, accessible, and credible, not experiments in idealism that risk chaos. By stepping back from manufactured outrage, citizens can channel energy into constructive oversight, holding parties accountable for genuine mobilisation and INEC for fair implementation within the given framework. True advancement emerges from acknowledging limitations while pursuing steady enhancements, not from demanding perfection that infrastructure cannot yet deliver. This measured stance positions the country for sustainable democratic growth, where every eligible voice finds expression without unnecessary obstacles.

Reflecting further, the provision adopted allows presiding officers to transmit electronically after forms are signed and witnessed, but explicitly provides that in cases of failure, the signed physical form becomes the primary basis for collation. This clause prevents paralysis if a unit loses signal midway or equipment malfunctions, ensuring results proceed through established manual channels with agent verification intact. Such contingency planning demonstrates foresight, not retreat. In contrast, a strict mandate could lead to prolonged disputes in affected areas, court interventions delaying declarations, or perceptions of selective disenfranchisement in regions already feeling marginalised. The flexible model mitigates these risks, promoting national cohesion over division.

Moreover, Musk’s consistent push for paper-based systems stems from first-hand knowledge of how code can be altered undetected or how dependencies on networks introduce single points of failure. His calls align with experts who stress that voting integrity hinges on redundancy and human oversight, not sole reliance on any one technology. Politicians exploiting the debate often reveal their strategy through repetition of unproven scenarios rather than policy alternatives. Their rhetoric thrives on emotion, but crumbles under the scrutiny of party organisational depth or historical electoral performance.

Encouraging widespread research empowers the populace. Access public records of past transmissions, review technical reports on network coverage, and follow discussions in legislative chambers. Knowledge dispels myths and strengthens demands for accountability across the board. Ultimately, parties rooted in communities navigate any credible process successfully because their support rests on tangible connections, not technological shortcuts. Those lacking such depth may clamour loudest for change, but their appeals ring hollow against evidence of capability.

Nigeria stands at a juncture where pragmatic choices foster enduring confidence. The National Assembly has opted for realism, preserving options that accommodate diversity while advancing digitally where viable. Embracing this allows focus on participation, vigilance, and reform where it matters most, building a democracy resilient to challenges and reflective of the people’s will.

Dr Ijeomah Arodiogbu is the national vice-chairman (South-East) of the All Progressives Congress.