The House of Representatives, yesterday, mounted a robust defence of the newly assented Electoral Act 2026, saying that the law, though “imperfect,” was enacted in strict compliance with constitutional and parliamentary procedures and reflects the collective will of the National Assembly.

This came as the African Democratic Congress, ADC, said it will mobilise Nigerians nationwide to protect the integrity of future elections, accusing President Bola Tinubu of weakening democratic credibility by signing the amended Electoral Act into law.

Also, Civil Society Organisations, CSOs, warned that unresolved loopholes in the new electoral law were threatening the credibility of the 2027 polls and flayed Tinubu’s hasty signing of the electoral bill into law.

Meanwhile, the Middle Belt Forum, MBF, said the amended Electoral Act signed Wednesday by President Tinubu has brought the Nigerian electoral process back to square one.

Speaking at a briefing convened by a coalition of CSOs in Abuja, the House Spokesman, Akin Rotimi, dismissed claims that the legislature ignored public opinion in adopting key provisions of the Act, particularly on electronic transmission of results.

Rotimi also expressed sympathy to protesters affected by a tear-gas incident at the National Assembly, describing it as regrettable and unconstitutional.

“Protesters who attend the National Assembly (protest) are entitled and constitutionally protected. It should never have happened, and we are looking into the circumstances,” he said, and urged civil society groups to guard against infiltration by “nefarious characters” during demonstrations.

Amid sharp criticism from civic groups over Section 63 and other contentious provisions, the lawmaker insisted that due process was strictly observed throughout the review of the 2022 Electoral Act, culminating in the 2026 amendment.

“Democratisation is a process. What we have may be imperfect, but it was done in the best interest of Nigerians,” he said.

He stressed that the conference committee, constituted to reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions, acted within its mandate and could not introduce entirely new provisions outside matters already before both chambers.

“For the first time, the law expressly mandates and recognises the IReV and electronic transmission of Form EC8A. The presiding officer shall mandatorily transmit results. Only if that fails does the manual process come in as a fallback,” he clarified.

Why Reps adopted Senate’s version

On why the House adopted what many perceived as the Senate’s position on electronic transmission, Rotimi explained that the conference committee process required compromise.

“It was bipartisan, APC, PDP, Labour Party, APGA, 12 members from each chamber. What emerged was new wording, not a simple adoption of one side.

“Walking out of plenary is part of expressing dissent. But majority decision prevails. The process was credible,” he said.

Addressing concerns that the bill was assented to by President Tinubu, within 24 hours of transmission to the Presidency, Rotimi argued that urgency was necessary to provide certainty in the electoral calendar.

“With electoral timelines already announced by INEC, it was important to avoid gaps that could undermine the process. Certainty is critical in electoral matters,” he said.

He welcomed calls for INEC to conduct a public simulation of its electronic transmission system ahead of the 2027 polls.

“Let’s test it, identify gaps, and fix them,” he urged.

Unhealthy loopholes

Civil society leaders at the briefing challenged the House on several fronts, questioning whether the law truly reflects the will of Nigerians.

They expressed concern that the fallback clause in Section 63 could become the norm rather than the exception, citing Nigeria’s history of discretionary abuses.

Others criticised the imposition of a N50 million administrative fee for political party registration, arguing it could stifle youth participation and restrict freedom of association in a struggling economy.

On party primaries, activists warned that formalising consensus candidacy, even with written consent, may entrench coercion and undermine internal party democracy.

One speaker described the day of passage as “the darkest day in Nigeria’s democratic history,” a claim Rotimi firmly rejected.

ADC vows mass mobilisation over Electoral Act

The opposition party in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, questioned what the party described as the undue haste with which the president approved the bill despite widespread public objections.

“With the alarmingly speedy assent to the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, President Tinubu has signed the death warrant on credible elections and, by so doing, set Nigeria’s democracy back by several decades.

“In signing the bill into law, the President claimed to be consolidating the country’s democracy, but in reality, he has simply corrupted it further by introducing ambiguity and permitting excessive discretion in the collation and transmission process.

“It is quite instructive that despite claiming to control more than 30 state governments and commanding a majority in both chambers of the National Assembly, the extraordinary haste with which this amendment was passed and signed raises the unavoidable question of why a government that wrongly boasts about being so politically dominant would rush changes to the electoral framework unless it harbours deep-seated doubts about submitting itself to a truly transparent and competitive process.

“The ADC is also deeply concerned about what this amendment portends for Nigeria’s forthcoming elections. In the absence of firm guarantees of electronic transparency, vigilant citizens may feel compelled to physically safeguard their votes to prevent discrepancies between polling units and collation centres, as has been witnessed in the past.

“As a duly constituted political party in the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the ADC affirms in the strongest and clearest possible terms that we are ready, willing, and prepared to defend the sanctity of Nigeria’s democracy using every constitutional and lawful means available to us.

“We will mobilise Nigerians toward vigilance, toward lawful participation, and toward unity in defence of their constitutional rights. We stand firm in the belief that the will of the people must prevail and that no law, however hastily enacted, can extinguish the democratic aspirations of a free nation,” the ADC said.

Missed opportunity for transformative reform

Earlier, leading CSOs in the country delivered a scathing verdict on the newly signed Electoral Act 2026, describing it as a “missed opportunity for transformative reform” and warning that unresolved loopholes could threaten the credibility of the 2027 general elections.

Addressing a press conference, hours after President Tinubu assented to the Act, a coalition including the Centre for Media and Society, CEMESO, The Kukah Centre, International Press Centre, IPC, ElectHer, Nigerian Women Trust Fund, TAF Africa, and Yiaga Africa condemned both the content of the new law and the manner of its passage by the National Assembly.

They acknowledged the formal repeal of the Electoral Act 2022 and the presidential assent granted to the new legislation. However, they argued that the process leading to its enactment was marred by speed, opacity, and what they termed a troubling disregard for legislative transparency.

Founder of The Albino Foundation, TAF, Jake Epelle, read a prepared text of the conference on behalf of the groups.

“Electoral law is the architecture of democratic competition. Its legitimacy depends not only on its content but on the openness and credibility of the process through which it is enacted,” the groups said.

The civil society organisations expressed “profound concern” over reports that the harmonised version of the bill was adopted by both chambers of the National Assembly via voice vote without prior distribution of the final consolidated text to all lawmakers.

According to the groups, some legislators later admitted publicly that they voted based on assurances from leadership rather than a review of the final legislative language, a development they described as a violation of informed legislative consent and parliamentary accountability.

They further alleged that last-minute amendments were inserted without publication or structured debate, including critical provisions relating to real-time electronic transmission of results.

“The speed and opacity raise serious concerns about lawmakers’ commitment to genuine electoral reform,” the coalition said.

They accused the Presidency of granting assent despite “credible legal, technical, and democratic concerns” raised by stakeholders, warning that the move signals political expediency over electoral integrity.

“This sets a dangerous precedent,” the groups cautioned, adding that public trust in elections, already fragile, must be strengthened, not “casually tested.”

We’re back to square one — MBF

Reacting to the signing of the Act amid protest by Nigerians, the National President of MBF, Dr. Bitrus Pogu urged the President and the National Assembly to revisit the law and yield to the demands of Nigerians noting that the law is defective.

He said: “We thank God for the quick response of the President to sign the Electoral Act, but quick response to what? The Electoral Act he signed is still defective because there is ambiguity in which one carries precedence.

“For example, we have really time transmission of results electronically but the manual uploading on IReV is still there.

“So, the real transmission is made and then somebody tampers with the result sheet and uploads it on the IReV and then there is a disparity. Now in that disparity which one has precedence in court. Will it be the electronically transmitted result real time, or will it be the uploaded physical paper recorded on the IReV?

“So, with this ambiguity we are still back to square one. People can still rig, change election results on the paper and upload it and when it gets to court, the copies of the papers uploaded may have precedence over the electronically transmitted result and such ambiguity will hunt us.

“Yes, we thank the President for signing quickly by acting on such a request from the Senate but the Senate needs to revisit this. And tell us that yes, we have agreed without choice because if it is left to Nigerians, our choice is that everything should be electronically transmitted cutting out any human participation.

“But since it is like that, they should say which one carries precedence over the other in the event there is a court action if the electronically transmitted sheet is seen as having precedence in any legal tussle and not the paper copy which will be uploaded at any given time by the electoral officers which still remains subject to human influence and can be manipulated or mutilated, changed or whatever can be done.

“So, we are still in a serious problem. The fact is that there is no community in Nigeria that is not covered by one telecom service provider or the other. And in the event these are not even there we have satellite phones all over the place. And there is no place that is not covered.” (Vanguard)

Update news