Why Nigeria Isn’t Ready for Real-Time E-Transmission of Election Results — The Truth Behind Lecky’s Statement and What It Means for 2027
Nigeria’s democratic evolution has been marked by intense debates on electoral transparency and integrity. At the heart of the reform conversation today is the question of whether the country is prepared for real-time electronic transmission of election results from polling units — a reform championed by activists but now facing scrutiny from experts and electoral insiders.
On Friday, February 6, 2026, Dr. Mustapha Lecky, a former National Commissioner of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), delivered a sobering assessment of Nigeria’s readiness for this proposed technological shift. Speaking on Channels Television’s Politics Today, he stated unequivocally that Nigeria is not technically prepared to implement mandatory real-time electronic transmission of election results — especially under the current electoral framework that still relies heavily on manual processes.
This revelation has reignited debates around electoral credibility, reform priorities, infrastructure deficits, and the political motives behind pushing for e-transmission. But beyond the headlines, what does this really mean for Nigeria’s democratic future — especially as the country prepares for the 2027 general elections?
---
1. Lecky’s Core Argument: The System Itself Isn’t Ready
Mustapha Lecky’s central point is rooted in a fundamental mismatch between Nigeria’s electoral reality and the technical requirements of real-time result transmission. According to his analysis:
Nigeria still conducts manual voting with paper ballots, not electronic voting. As long as ballots are cast physically, there must be manual counting at polling units before any transmission takes place.
Every result begins with the EC8A form — a legally binding document signed by party agents present at the polling unit. It is this form that serves as the official record of results and not an electronic stream of data.
Talking about real-time transmission before first implementing electronic voting is premature. Nigeria has yet to adopt electronic voting systems; therefore, instantaneous electronic result uploads would conflict with the current physical voting process.
Lecky’s stance highlights that election technology reforms cannot be isolated promises — they must be justified through the lens of technological readiness, legal frameworks, and electoral process integrity.
---
2. The Infrastructure Gap: Realities on the Ground
One of the greatest barriers to implementing real-time results transmission is infrastructure — or the lack of it.
Nigeria’s vast geography includes many rural, riverine, and underserved communities where:
Mobile network coverage is weak or non-existent.
Reliable electricity remains inconsistent.
Internet access is limited or unaffordable for many polling staff.
Experts outside INEC have echoed similar concerns. For instance, former Deputy Governor Mukhtar Shagari pointed out that these infrastructural deficits — from power supply to network services — make real-time transmission impractical in many parts of the country. He noted that even countries with longer democratic histories, like the United States, have faced challenges with election result transmission.
Furthermore, civil society organizations worry that mandatory electronic transmission could unintentionally disenfranchise voters, particularly in regions where networks fail or systems collapse. They argue that without reliable digital infrastructure, insisting on e-transmission might delay results, sow confusion, or create opportunities for exploitation.
---
3. Legal Framework and Legislative Resistance
The debate over real-time transmission recently spilled into the halls of the National Assembly. A key amendment to Clause 60(3) of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill — which sought to make real-time electronic transmission from polling units mandatory — was rejected by the Senate. Instead, the Senate retained the existing language that allows INEC discretion on how results are transmitted.
This legislative outcome suggests significant resistance to hardcoding real-time transmission into law, and it reflects broader institutional caution:
Some lawmakers believe mandating such technology could deepen uncertainty if the systems fail.
Others argue it should remain within INEC’s discretion to deploy technology when and where it is ready.
Still, others fear that a rushed introduction could create legal loopholes for contestation and litigation.
While the House of Representatives had earlier approved mandatory e-transmission provisions, the Senate’s rejection indicates a split among legislators on how fast and how far electoral technology should advance before the 2027 elections.
---
4. Existing Digital Tools: Enough or Not Enough?
Lecky pointed out that Nigeria already uses digital tools in elections — primarily the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) — which were introduced to improve transparency and credibility.
BVAS is used to verify voter identity at the polling unit, helping to prevent fraud and manage accreditation.
IReV provides a platform where results can be uploaded and viewed digitally by stakeholders.
While these tools represent progress, Lecky emphasized that they are intended to supplement, not replace, the core physical verification and counting processes that must occur at the polling unit before results are uploaded. This underscores the argument that it is not a lack of innovation but a matter of integrating tools into the broader electoral architecture.
---
5. Risks of Rushing Into Real-Time Transmission
The push for real-time electronic transmission of results is often framed as a revolutionary step toward ending electoral fraud. Advocates argue that instantaneous uploads reduce opportunities for tampering between polling units and collation centers. Critics of the Senate’s decision, including civil society and political parties, have also made this case.
However, forcing the technology before it is ready could result in:
System failures and delays that undermine confidence in the process.
Cybersecurity vulnerabilities, including hacking, data interception, or manipulation if networks and systems are not hardened.
Logistical confusion that could inflame tensions during an already tense election period.
Legal challenges over results that could reverse or suspend outcomes if data integrity is questioned.
In a country where electoral mistrust runs high and political stakes are intense, these risks cannot be discounted.
---
6. Politics, Perception, and the Broader Narrative
Beyond technical readiness, the debate over real-time result transmission has become deeply political. Observers argue that pushing narratives about readiness (or lack thereof) can sometimes be used to shape public perception — either to support transparency reforms or, conversely, to weaken the process for political advantage.
In some circles, critics claim that debates around e-transmission are being manipulated to create confusion, erode public trust, or open pathways for manipulation ahead of the 2027 elections, much like some narratives used previously in international contexts for political purposes. While these claims require careful evidence and investigation, they reflect how election technology debates become entangled with broader discourses about power and trust.
---
7. The Path Forward: What Must Happen Before 2027
What emerges from this complex set of discussions is that technological ambition must be matched with capacity building, infrastructure investment, legal clarity, and public trust. If Nigeria truly aspires to adopt real-time electronic transmission of results, the pathway involves:
Strengthening internet and power infrastructure nationwide.
Training electoral officials and stakeholders on digital election tools.
Rolling out pilot programs to test real-time systems in controlled environments.
Enhancing cybersecurity frameworks and institutional oversight.
Ensuring legislative clarity to support sustainable electoral reform.
At its core, the challenge is not simply about technology adoption — it is about building an electoral ecosystem where technology reinforces trust rather than undermines it.
---
Conclusion: Preparedness vs. Aspiration
Nigeria stands at an inflection point. The aspiration for credible, transparent elections — underpinned by technology — is widely shared. Yet, as Dr. Mustapha Lecky has pointed out, aspiration cannot precede preparedness. A democratic process that moves too quickly into technology without the requisite foundation could do more harm than good.
As the country gears up for the 2027 elections, the focus should be on strengthening existing systems, expanding digital infrastructure, and ensuring that any future adoption of real-time electronic transmission is backed by solid technical readiness and broad stakeholder confidence.
Only then can technology serve as a force for electoral integrity rather than a source of chaos and vulnerability.
0 Comments