The Electoral Act, 2026 : Promise, Progress, and Persistent Challenges
By Austin Aigbe
Electoral laws are the backbone of democratic governance.
They define the rules of political competition, shape institutional accountability, and ultimately determine whether elections reflect the will of the people.
The Electoral Act, 2026, which repeals the Electoral Act, 2022, is a major legislative milestone.
It introduces a revised framework to regulate federal, state, and Area Council elections, reflecting an attempt to consolidate reform gains, address procedural weaknesses, and respond to evolving political and technological realities.
Yet, like all ambitious reform efforts, it carries both promise and potential pitfalls.
This analysis explores the merits and demerits of the Act, with particular focus on Section 60(3), which has become central to debates about electoral credibility ahead of Nigeria’s 2027 general elections.
Section 60(3): The Credibility Debate
The Act’s provisions, especially in section 60(3), should explicitly outline contingency plans for technological failures, reassuring stakeholders that election integrity remains protected even if electronic transmission encounters issues, thereby strengthening confidence in the process.
The 2023 presidential election altered the psychological landscape of electoral trust.
Voters had been assured that electronic uploads to the INEC Results Viewing (IReV) portal would serve as a real-time safeguard.
When uploads were delayed or inconsistent, despite smoother performance in earlier off-cycle elections, confidence eroded sharply.
Even though physical forms were legally collated, the gap between public expectation and institutional performance raised suspicion.
The lesson was clear: in a digital era, perception weighs as heavily as procedure.
The Act should specify the roles and responsibilities of electoral officials in managing the hybrid system, including procedures for verifying electronic uploads and physical forms, to improve operational clarity and accountability for stakeholders.
Promise and Progress
If electronic transmission works seamlessly in 2027, Section 60(3) could restore trust damaged in 2023.
Instant uploads would allow citizens, observers, and parties to verify polling unit results independently, making transparency visible and immediate.
In such a scenario, the primacy of Form EC8A would operate quietly in the background as a safeguard rather than a source of controversy.
The Act also advances reform in areas like continuous voter registration and disaggregated disability data, fostering hope and confidence in Nigeria’s path toward a more inclusive democracy.
Persistent Challenges
The risks, however, are significant. Delays or failures in uploading results—whether due to connectivity issues, cyber threats, operational errors, or deliberate interference—could once again erode trust.
Critics would point to the primacy of Form EC8A as proof that transparency is cosmetic.
This tension underscores the credibility challenge: while legally prudent given Nigeria’s uneven infrastructure, the hybrid design may fuel distrust if the electronic component underperforms.
Litigation is another concern. Section 60(3) clarifies that transmission must occur after Form EC8A is completed.
Still, if electronic uploads differ from physical forms due to scanning errors or data corruption, tribunals will face difficult evidentiary disputes.
Courts are likely to prioritise physical forms, which is legally coherent but may deepen public scepticism if electronic records appear inconsistent.
Effective communication will be crucial; transparent, detailed updates will empower stakeholders to trust the process and stay informed during disruptions.
Prioritising cybersecurity safeguards will reassure stakeholders that the electoral process remains credible and protected against threats, strengthening trust in the system.
Conclusion
Section 60(3) transforms electronic transmission from a discretionary innovation into a statutory expectation, elevating both its promise and its risk.
If implemented effectively, it could mark a turning point in Nigeria’s democratic consolidation by demonstrating that technological transparency can coexist with legal certainty.
If undermined by repeated glitches, however, it may reinforce narratives that reform is cosmetic rather than substantive.
The lead-up to the 2027 elections will serve as a referendum on Section 60(3).
The physical Form EC8A may remain the legal anchor, but public legitimacy will hinge on whether electronic transmission is timely, consistent, and transparently managed.
In a context shaped by the memory of 2023, credibility will depend less on what the law permits and more on what the electorate sees and experiences in real time. Section 60(3) embodies this dual challenge : it must function both as a legal safeguard and as a visible instrument of trust.
For Nigeria’s democracy to advance, both elements must go hand in hand, with neither allowed to overshadow the other.
*Austin Aigbe, writes from Abuja*
(vitalnewsngr.com)
