A stormy session engulfed the House of Representatives on Tuesday as lawmakers engaged in a heated confrontation over a motion seeking to rescind the passage of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill.
The tension began when Francis Waive, Chairman of the House Committee on Rules and Business, moved a motion to revisit and reverse the chamber’s earlier approval of the bill passed on December 23, 2025.
When Speaker Tajudeen Abbas subjected the motion to a voice vote, confusion followed. Although the “nays” appeared more pronounced than the “ayes,” the Speaker ruled that the motion had been carried - a declaration that immediately sparked loud protests across the chamber.
Several lawmakers rose in objection, shouting and challenging the ruling. The disagreement quickly escalated into a rowdy exchange, disrupting the day’s proceedings and exposing deep divisions within the House.
In an effort to restore order, Abbas proposed that the House move into an executive session to address the matter privately. However, members resisted the suggestion. Despite the pushback, the Speaker directed that the chamber proceed into a closed-door session.
At the heart of the controversy is the contentious provision on the electronic transmission of election results.
When the House passed the Electoral Act amendment in December, it approved a clause mandating the real-time electronic transmission of results from polling units to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) Result Viewing Portal (IReV).
The provision stipulates that presiding officers must electronically transmit results from each polling unit to the IReV portal after completing and signing Form EC8A, with countersignatures from candidates or their agents where available.
However, when the Senate initially considered the bill earlier this month, it rejected the mandatory real-time transmission clause, drawing criticism from civil society organisations and electoral reform advocates who argued that electronic transmission is critical to transparency.
In a dramatic twist on Tuesday, the Senate rescinded its earlier decision and approved electronic transmission of results, but introduced a caveat allowing manual collation to serve as a fallback in cases of technological failure.
The differing positions between the two chambers have necessitated the formation of a conference committee to harmonise their respective versions of the bill. Beyond the transmission clause, other areas of disagreement remain unresolved.
Civil society organisations have urged the National Assembly to retain the House’s original provision for real-time transmission without weakening safeguards, warning that any dilution could undermine public trust in the electoral process.
Tuesday’s chaotic plenary underscores the intense debate surrounding electoral reforms, as lawmakers grapple with provisions that could shape the credibility and transparency of future elections in Nigeria.
Leave a Reply