![Popular Small-Size Actress Aunty Ajara Dies After Liver Illness [VIDEO]](https://thepunchng.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/20241109_125042-75x75.jpg)
The wisest and most urgent advice that well-meaning Nigerians can offer the National Assembly today—particularly the Senate—is simple: know when to stop playing with fire.
For many citizens, the Senate has sadly come to represent an ignoble and withering institution—one that appears increasingly detached from public interest and disturbingly comfortable with the betrayal of public trust. Over time, lawmakers have earned a reputation for prioritising personal and partisan interests above the welfare of their constituents.
This pattern is familiar:
- Blocking or watering down critical reform legislation such as electoral reforms, anti-corruption measures, and constitutional amendments on devolution of power;
- Approving bloated budgetary allocations for the legislature while public services crumble;
- Confirming clearly unfit executive nominees in exchange for political favours;
- And engaging in other perfidious actions at great public expense.
A Dangerous Vote Against Electoral Transparency
On Wednesday, February 4, 2026, the Senate voted against a proposal to make electronic transmission of election results mandatory in the Electoral Act (Amendment) Bill. It then attempted to mislead Nigerians by claiming that it “did not reject electronic transmission.”
This denial is disingenuous.
What the Senate did is worse. In a closed and opaque plenary session, senators deliberately retained Section 60(5) of the Electoral Act 2022, which reads:
“The presiding officer shall transfer the results, including the total number of accredited voters and the results of the ballot, in a manner as prescribed by the Commission.”
By preserving this vague wording—one that leaves the method and timing of result transmission entirely to the discretion of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)—the Senate once again weaponised ambiguity in Nigeria’s electoral law.
This Was No Innocent Oversight
This action was neither accidental nor a harmless technical compromise. It was a calculated decision taken with full awareness of Nigeria’s recent electoral history and the deeply frustrated mood of citizens battered by corruption, poverty, and bad governance.
No reasonable Nigerian is fooled by this manoeuvre.
Every Nigerian who paid attention to the 2023 general election knows that this very clause created the loophole that eroded public trust and severely damaged the integrity of our democracy. Real-time electronic transmission was promised in practice but not enforced by law. When it failed, citizens were told to accept “procedural explanations” instead of verifiable outcomes.
That same clause enabled a disastrous gap between what Nigerians were assured would happen and what the law allowed INEC to do. It also handed a compromised judiciary the space to deliver judgments that fuelled confusion, distrust, national tension, and ultimately delegitimised the government sworn into office.
Ambiguity Is Not Neutral—It Is Dangerous
For the Senate to deliberately preserve this ambiguity after witnessing its consequences is an act of grave irresponsibility. When lawmakers reject clear, enforceable safeguards and cling to discretion, they are not protecting institutions—they are protecting predetermined outcomes.
Adding insult to injury, the claim that “electronic transmission was not rejected” is political sleight of hand. Electronic transmission that is optional, discretionary, and unenforceable offers no protection against systemic electoral fraud.
Discretion does not reassure citizens. Transparency does.
This vote is widely seen for what it is: a deliberate refusal to close the door that was abused in 2023. It sends a clear signal that lessons have not been learnt, that transparency is negotiable, and that those in power prefer plausible deniability to democratic certainty.
Independence Does Not Mean Opacity
Nigerians must never again be insulted with claims that this decision protects “INEC’s independence” or “operational flexibility.” Institutional independence does not require opacity, and flexibility must never be a cover for unverifiability.
Every serious democracy hardwires clarity, transparency, and compulsion into its electoral laws precisely to protect the system from bad actors—especially incumbents.
A Final Warning
The 2023 elections tested Nigeria’s cohesion. The country survived not because the system worked, but because citizens restrained themselves despite deep frustration.
If future elections are again disputed under the cover of discretionary loopholes, responsibility will be clear. It will rest squarely on those who saw the danger, understood it fully, and chose to plunge the nation into it anyway.
What the Senate Must Do—Now
The Nigerian Senate knows what it must do.
Cancel the emergency two-week recess announced on February 5. Reconvene immediately. And in a live, broadcast plenary session, unanimously pass into law the exact reform that was proposed on electronic transmission of results.
For the avoidance of doubt, the proposed provision reads:
“The presiding officer shall electronically transmit the results from each polling unit to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) in real time, and such transmission shall be done after the prescribed Form EC8A has been signed and stamped by the presiding officer and, where available, countersigned by candidates or polling unit agents.”
It is that simple.
Playing with fire is never wise. Transparency is always better.
— Oby Ezekwesili
Founder, School of Politics, Policy and Governance (SPPG)
