Senator representing Anambra Central, Victor Umeh, has acknowledged that Nigerians are justified in expressing anger and disappointment toward the Senate over reports surrounding the consideration of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2026, admitting that lawmakers have been subjected to widespread public outrage because citizens feel betrayed by the process and its reported outcome.
Speaking on Channels Television on Thursday, Umeh said the insults and criticism directed at senators reflect the deep sensitivity Nigerians attach to electoral reforms, especially in the aftermath of the disputed 2023 general elections. According to him, the controversy stems from a perceived disconnect between what senators internally agreed upon and what was eventually communicated to the public.
“Nigerians are right to be angry. They have called us all manners of names. We have to take the insult because, from the news they got, they feel disappointed and betrayed,” Umeh said.
Despite the backlash, the senator stressed that the National Assembly must not succumb to making laws that serve personal or partisan interests. He warned that any attempt to pass self-serving legislation would further erode public confidence in democratic institutions and weaken Nigeria’s electoral credibility.
“We are for the Nigerian people. Nobody should make a law that will be self-serving. Our responsibility is to make laws that will correct problems in Nigeria and put this country on a very strong footing so that we can have a credible democratic system,” he stated.
Umeh emphasised that the issue of elections remains one of the most sensitive aspects of governance and democracy, insisting it must never be treated lightly or reduced to political manoeuvring.
“The issue of elections is a very sensitive one—very, very sensitive. It is not something anybody can do playing hide and seek. We must agree to it and treat it with the seriousness it deserves,” he said.
Explaining the root of the current controversy, Umeh said Nigerians reacted angrily because the outcome announced from the Senate did not reflect the consensus that emerged during internal deliberations, particularly in a closed executive session.
According to him, the legislative process that produced the Electoral Act Amendment Bill was neither rushed nor careless. He described it as a rigorous and inclusive process involving first and second readings, zonal public hearings across the country, extensive stakeholder consultations, and detailed reports by a joint committee of the National Assembly.
“It takes a process to make a law. A bill must go through readings, public hearings, consultations, debate, and then passage. Laws are not made for the sake of it; they are made to solve problems,” Umeh explained.
He disclosed that one of the strongest demands that emerged during public hearings nationwide was the need to clearly provide for electronic transmission of election results, particularly in response to the controversies that followed the 2023 general elections.
Umeh noted that the debate over result transmission became unavoidable after the presidential election petitions, which went all the way to the Supreme Court.
“During the presidential election cases, arguments were taken on whether results uploaded to the IReV portal had legal backing. The Supreme Court held that electronic transmission was not expressly provided for in the law and therefore discountenanced such evidence,” he said.
According to the senator, the apex court’s position exposed a critical gap in the Electoral Act 2022—one that stakeholders overwhelmingly agreed must be addressed urgently to avoid a repeat of the 2023 experience.
“Stakeholders across the country agreed that the law must be amended to clearly provide for electronic transmission so that courts will not again dismiss electronically transmitted results as ‘unknown to law’,” Umeh stated.
He further explained that both chambers of the National Assembly worked independently on the amendment bill. The House of Representatives, he said, had already passed its own version of the bill with clear and unambiguous provisions mandating electronic transmission of election results.
Umeh revealed that when the Senate considered the bill in a closed executive session, there was overwhelming support for electronic transmission among senators.
“Over 85 per cent of senators agreed to electronic transmission. It was common ground. Even the ad hoc committee of the Senate agreed to it,” he said.
He clarified that the only modification agreed upon during the executive session was the removal of the phrase “in real time”, due to concerns about network coverage and connectivity challenges in remote parts of the country.
“It was only ‘real time’ that was expunged because of network issues. Transmission itself was never in dispute,” Umeh explained.
However, he said confusion arose during plenary when a motion was reportedly introduced to replace the word “transmission” with “transfer”, allegedly without any debate.
“There was no debate on it. If debate had been allowed, it would have taken us back to the executive session where this issue had already been exhaustively discussed and resolved,” he said.
Umeh argued that substituting “transmission” with “transfer” would effectively strip the provision of its intended meaning.
“You cannot talk about transfer to the IReV portal without electronic transmission. How do you transfer results to a portal if it is not done electronically?” he asked.
He insisted that the Senate never agreed to revert to the wording of the Electoral Act 2022, which merely allowed the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to “transfer” results at its discretion.
Reacting to the sustained public backlash, Umeh said Nigerians’ anger clearly showed that what was announced from plenary did not reflect the understanding and agreement reached by lawmakers behind closed doors.
According to him, Nigerians are demanding a more credible, transparent, and trustworthy electoral process, especially after the controversies and litigation that followed the 2023 elections.
Nevertheless, the senator stressed that the legislative process on the Electoral Act Amendment Bill is not yet concluded. He noted that the Senate has not adopted its Votes and Proceedings from the sitting that generated the controversy.
“We have not finished. The Votes and Proceedings of yesterday have not been approved. It is only approved proceedings that go to the conference committee for harmonisation,” Umeh said.
He expressed confidence that the issue would be corrected during the harmonisation process between the Senate and the House of Representatives.
“When we return to approve the Votes and Proceedings, the question will be asked whether it truly reflects what we did. I believe the agreed position on electronic transmission will be restored,” he said.
The Senate had on Tuesday passed the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2026, retaining the existing provision that allows INEC to transfer election results as it deems fit, rather than explicitly mandating electronic transmission.
The bill also introduced other changes, including shorter election timelines, adoption of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) while retaining the Permanent Voter Card (PVC) as the only recognised voter identification, a reduction in penalties for PVC trading to two years’ imprisonment with a ₦5 million fine, and the establishment of a conference committee to harmonise the Senate version with that of the House of Representatives.
