Nigeria’s next election rules are being shaped under pressure, suspicion and a race against the clock.
That was the message from Attorney Dr. Mathew Nwaogu, representing Aboh Mbaise/Ngor Okpala Federal Constituency of Imo State, who revealed deep divisions inside the House of Representatives over proposed amendments to the Electoral Act, a debate he says could determine the credibility of future elections.
According to him, Lawmakers are no longer willing to pass legislation on trust after controversies surrounding previous laws.
“Members have become cautious. Everything we pass now must be exactly what we approved,” he said.
The fiercest dispute centres on how election results should move from polling units into the national tally.
The House had earlier resolved that results must be transmitted electronically and in real time.
But during committee review, a qualifying clause, a “proviso” was introduced.
For some Lawmakers, that single addition changes everything.
Opponents argue that allowing discretion means results could first be moved physically to collation centres before upload, a window they believe opens the door to manipulation.
“Once transmission is not done at the polling unit, the figures can be altered before upload. Real-time means real-time at the polling unit,” he insisted.
The disagreement escalated to a formal division of the chamber, separating majority and minority blocs in a rare open alignment over electoral trust.
A second flashpoint emerged over nomination procedures for political parties.
Existing provisions allow parties to choose among three systems:
Direct primaries
Indirect primaries
Consensus selection
However, the amendment proposes removing indirect primaries, leaving only direct or consensus options.
Critics warn this could enable external interference in rival parties.
“If anyone with a party card can vote in direct primaries, opponents can infiltrate another party and influence its candidate,” the lawmaker argued.
Supporters, however, see direct primaries as expanding internal democracy.
Beyond procedure, punishment is also under scrutiny.
Current penalties including fines as low as ₦500,000 are viewed by some lawmakers as too weak to deter electoral crimes.
The proposed alternative: jail terms of up to 10 years for serious violations.
The argument is framed as a national security issue rather than administrative compliance.
One justification for flexibility in electronic transmission has been limited telecommunications coverage in parts of the country.
But opponents reject that explanation.
They argue that allowing infrastructure gaps to dictate electoral transparency reverses governance priorities insisting that nationwide connectivity should be treated as essential public infrastructure, not an electoral exception.
The urgency is driven by election timelines.
Once the electoral umpire releases guidelines, legal deadlines begin to close.
Lawmakers now face a narrow legislative window to agree on rules before implementation stages become locked in.
Failure to resolve the dispute could leave the country operating under ambiguous provisions, a scenario analysts warn could trigger litigation after elections.
For reform advocates, the amendment is not a technical debate but a trust referendum.
The Lawmaker says the final decision may ultimately depend on public pressure rather than parliamentary negotiation.
“If Nigerians want credible elections, they must make their position clear now,” he said.
With deadlines approaching and divisions widening, the Electoral Act amendment has evolved into more than legislation, it is becoming the first political contest of the next election cycle.
