By Obinna Uballa
Proceedings in the House of Representatives descended into chaos on Tuesday as lawmakers clashed over a motion seeking to rescind the passage of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill.
Tension flared during plenary when Francis Waive, Chairman of the House Committee on Rules and Business, moved a motion urging the chamber to reverse its earlier decision on the bill, which was passed on December 23, 2025.
Speaker Tajudeen Abbas put the motion to a voice vote, but confusion quickly followed. Although the “nays” appeared louder than the “ayes,” Abbas ruled that the nays had carried the vote, a decision that immediately triggered uproar in the chamber.
Several lawmakers protested loudly, accusing the presiding officer of misjudging the voice vote. The disagreement escalated, with members hollering in objection and disrupting proceedings.
In an attempt to restore order, the Speaker called for the House to move into an executive session. However, that proposal was also met with resistance from lawmakers. Despite the pushback, Abbas proceeded to move the chamber into a closed-door session.
The controversy is tied to the contentious provisions of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill, particularly the clause on the electronic transmission of election results.
When the green chamber passed the amendment in December, it approved a provision mandating the real-time electronic transmission of election results from polling units to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) Result Viewing Portal (IReV).
The approved clause states that the presiding officer “shall electronically transmit the results from each polling unit to the IReV portal in real time” after the prescribed Form EC8A has been duly signed and stamped, and countersigned where applicable by candidates or polling unit agents.
However, the Senate, in its earlier consideration of the bill this month, rejected the proposal for mandatory real-time electronic transmission, a decision that sparked criticism from civil society groups and electoral reform advocates.
In a dramatic reversal on Tuesday, the upper chamber rescinded its earlier decision and approved electronic transmission of results to IReV. The Senate, however, introduced a caveat that manual collation of results should serve as a fallback in the event of technological failure.
The differing positions between the two chambers necessitated the constitution of a conference committee to harmonise their versions of the bill. Beyond the electronic transmission clause, there are additional sections where both chambers are yet to align.
Civil society organisations have since urged the National Assembly to retain the House’s original position mandating real-time electronic transmission without dilution, arguing that it is critical to strengthening electoral transparency and public confidence.
