The “Trap Door”: Senate Approves E-Transmission, But Critics Fear New ‘Manual Fallback’ Clause is a License to Rig
ABUJA — It looks like a victory for democracy, but civil society groups are calling it a “Trojan Horse.”
The Nigerian Senate has passed the long-awaited amendment to the Electoral Act 2026, finally giving legal backing to the electronic transmission of results. However, buried in the fine print is a controversial new proviso: the “Fallback Mechanism.”
This clause, inserted late into Section 64, allows the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to revert to manual collation using physical result sheets (Form EC8A) if—and only if—there is a “technological glitch” or “network failure.”
As the 2027 election draws closer, the integrity of the vote may hinge on which version of “practicality” survives the committee stage: the House’s rigid digital wall, or the Senate’s manual trap door.
While the Senate argues this is a necessary practicality for Nigeria’s remote areas, election experts warn it effectively legalizes the “glitch” excuse that marred the 2023 general election.
The “Glitch” is Now Law
The danger, according to critics, lies in the wording. The Old Law (2022): Was ambiguous about whether the IReV (digital) or the EC8A (paper) was superior. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of paper. The New Law (2026): Explicitly makes electronic transmission primary UNLESS technical issues arise. The Loophole: “By codifying the ‘fallback’ to manual results, the Senate has given corrupt actors a legal incentive to sabotage networks,” says Samson Itodo, Executive Director of Yiaga Africa. “If a politician knows they are losing in a specific ward, they only need to jam the network, force a ‘glitch,’ and then swap the manual result sheets. The law now protects that sabotage.”
INEC’s Practicality vs. Integrity
INEC Chairman Prof. Mahmood Yakubu has defended the clause as a “necessity of infrastructure.” During the Senate hearing, INEC technical directors argued that without a fallback option, elections in rural areas with zero internet connectivity (blind spots) would be legally inconclusive. “We cannot disenfranchise a village because MTN or Glo has no signal there,” an INEC National Commissioner told the press. “We need a manual backup.”
The “Golden Opportunity” for Manipulation
However, opposition senators argue that the “Fallback Mechanism” grants INEC returning officers too much discretionary power. A Returning Officer can simply declare that the BVAS device “failed to upload” due to a “network error,” proceed to collate manually, and announce a winner based on paper sheets that differ from the polling unit count. Under the new amendment, once that manual result is declared based on the “fallback,” the burden of proof shifts to the petitioner to prove the network didn’t fail—an almost impossible legal hurdle.
House Harmonization: The Last Line of Defense
The bill now moves to a Harmonization Committee to reconcile the Senate’s version with the House of Representatives’ version. The House version is stricter, requiring that in the event of a network failure, the election in that unit should be suspended until the device can be moved to a network-active area to upload, rather than reverting to manual sheets immediately.
As the 2027 election draws closer, the integrity of the vote may hinge on which version of “practicality” survives the committee stage: the House’s rigid digital wall, or the Senate’s manual trap door.