KEY POINTS

• Opposition lawmakers exited plenary after their demand to eliminate manual result collation as a backup was rejected.
• Heated arguments, disputed voice votes, and procedural complaints led to a rowdy legislative session.
• The amended bill still allows manual collation if electronic transmission fails and introduces changes to election notice timelines and party primaries.

Tension erupted in the House of Representatives as opposition lawmakers staged a walkout during plenary following disagreements over proposed amendments to the Electoral Act.

The controversy centred on a clause allowing manual collation of election results if electronic transmission fails.

Lawmakers pushing for stricter electoral transparency demanded that electronic transmission of results be made compulsory without any fallback to manual collation.

The proposed amendment to section 60(3) states that presiding officers must upload polling unit results to the Independent National Electoral Commission result viewing portal after signing Form EC8A. However, it also permits reliance on the physical form if technical failures prevent transmission.

Background to the Legislative Clash

In December, the lower chamber had adopted a clause mandating real-time electronic transmission of results.

Meanwhile, the Senate initially rejected that proposal before later approving it, with the same fallback clause allowing manual collation when technology fails. That compromise has since drawn criticism from transparency advocates and opposition lawmakers.

The plenary became heated when Francis Waive moved a motion to rescind the earlier passage of the bill. When Speaker Tajudeen Abbas called for a voice vote, lawmakers claimed the “nays” were louder, but he ruled in favour of the “ayes,” sparking loud protests.

An attempt to move proceedings into a closed executive session was also resisted, yet the speaker proceeded with it.

After reconvening, Adebayo Balogun began presenting the bill’s provisions before Deputy Speaker Benjamin Kalu directed him to read only the long title.

Kalu then read multiple clauses together, prompting objections from lawmakers who insisted on a clause-by-clause review and complained they lacked copies of the bill.

When section 60, covering result transmission, was reached, lawmakers sought amendments. Bamidele Salam proposed removing the manual collation fallback, but the amendment was rejected by voice vote. Another proposal prioritising electronically uploaded results over physical forms was also defeated.