Godswill Akpabio, Senate President, has once again, sought to clear the air over the position of the Senate on the issue of electronic transmission of election results, saying that rather than reject it, all that members did was to remove the term “real-time” to avoid legal and technical issues.
He explained that the change allowed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) flexibility to choose the most suitable method of transmission, considering network and security challenges, and reaffirmed the Senate’s commitment to laws that reflect the will of Nigerians.
At the unveiling of a book titled “The Burden of Legislators in Nigeria” by Effiong Bob, a former Senator, Akpabio explained that electronic transmission remained permissible under the law, but added that the only adjustment made was the removal of the phrase “real time” from the provision.
Hear him: “I must state clearly, without ambiguity, that the senate has not removed any means of transmission. If you want to use a bicycle to carry your votes from one polling unit to the ward centre, do so. If you want to use your phone to transmit, do so. If you want to use your iPad, do so.
“All we said during the discussion was that we should remove the word ‘real-time’ because if you say ‘real-time, then there is a network or grid failure, and the network is not working. When you go to court, somebody will say it ought to have been real-time. That was all we said.
“Real time means that in over nine states where networks are not working because of insecurity, there will be no election results. Nationally, if the national grid collapses and no network is working, no election results will be valid.”
Maintaining that the decision was intended to give INEC the flexibility to determine the most suitable mode of result transmission in view of technological and security realities, he added that the Senate would continue to pass laws that reflect the wishes and interests of Nigerians.
But David Mark, the longest serving Nigerian Senate President, and current National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), countered the position saying it neither lay in the mouth of Akpabo nor the National Assembly to decide the workability of electronic transmission but INEC, adding that the electoral body must be allowed to decide whether it could transmit election results electronically or not.
His words: “Let INEC decide whether they can do it (real-time electronic transmission) or not. Don’t speak for INEC. What the public demands is electronic transmission. If INEC cannot do it, it’s their own problem, and it’s not for you to speak for INEC. It’s as simple as that, but that is just a by-the-way issue; it’s not a serious issue.”
Mark, while stressed that the debate, while important, should not distract from the core demand for transparent elections.