Mr. Chinedu Oaks Ukpola, initiator and National Convener of the National Electoral Reform Coalition (NERCO), has spoken on the debate surrounding real-time electronic transmission of election results and the legislative developments linked to Nigeria’s electoral reform process.
He made the remarks during an interview at the Landslide News studio in Wuye, Abuja, hosted by Kingsley Okiemoya, with Kingsley Okafor as a fellow discussant.
Ukpola explained that the formation of NERCO followed his extensive review of the last general elections and the court cases that emerged afterward. According to him, the experience exposed systemic issues within the electoral process and inspired the need for organised reform advocacy.
Addressing public conversations around reform movements targeting the National Assembly, Ukpola explained that his group had developed its own advocacy initiative aimed at engaging lawmakers and pushing for electoral reforms. However, he clarified that their approach was not structured as a protest. Instead, it was designed as policy advocacy and legislative engagement through dialogue, lobbying, and stakeholder consultations.
He noted that he had already begun engaging senators and traditional leaders as part of that strategy, adding that the groundwork for the initiative had been laid last year alongside collaborators, including Peter Randi.
Speaking on the controversy surrounding electronic voting and transmission of results, Ukpola traced the legislative journey of the electoral amendment bill. He said the Senate attempted to consider the bill several times but repeatedly postponed deliberations due to competing priorities, including urgent matters requiring immediate attention.
He alleged that political manoeuvring accompanied the delays, claiming some actors sought to consolidate support among senators as debate intensified over provisions for electronic transmission of results.
According to him, a large majority of senators supported electronic transmission but exercised caution regarding full digital voting because of concerns about vulnerability to hacking. This, he said, informed the preference for electronic transmission of results rather than complete digital voting.
Ukpola further alleged that misinformation circulated before lawmakers concluded deliberations, creating public confusion about the outcome of the bill. He claimed reports suggested electronic transmission had been rejected even though provisions in the bill explicitly allowed it.
Reading from Section 60 of the proposed legislation, he emphasised that electronic transmission was clearly provided for without exception at the point of passage. He argued that public reactions triggered by what he described as misleading narratives later influenced amendments introducing contingency provisions in case transmission fails.
According to him, the Senate initially passed the bill in favour of electronic transmission but subsequent developments reflected political pressure and public response. He also referenced the position of the House of Representatives, noting that its provisions similarly addressed transmission within the same section of the bill.
Ukpola concluded that the episode demonstrates how public perception and information flow can shape legislative outcomes, stressing the importance of careful scrutiny and informed engagement in electoral reform discussions.
