Opposition lawmakers in the House of Representatives staged a walkout from plenary on Tuesday over the Electoral Act amendment bill.
The lawmakers exited the chamber after the House adopted manually collated results as the primary source in the event of system failure during electronic transmission.
This provision aligns with the version earlier passed by the Senate.
As they walked out, the lawmakers shouted “APC ole” — a Yoruba phrase meaning “APC, thief.”
Dispute Over Section 60(3)
The controversy centres on the fresh amendment to section 60(3) of the Electoral Act.
The revised clause provides that the presiding officer shall electronically transmit results from each polling unit to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) result viewing (IReV) portal. The transmission must follow the signing and stamping of Form EC8A.
However, the clause adds a caveat. If electronic transmission fails due to a communication breakdown, the manually signed Form EC8A will remain the primary source for collation and declaration of results.
Opposition lawmakers insisted that the provision should end after the first paragraph. In effect, they sought to delete the fallback clause that prioritises manual collation where technology fails.
Background to the Amendment
In December, the House amended the Electoral Act and adopted a proposal mandating real-time transmission of results to the IReV portal.
The clause required presiding officers to transmit results in real time after completing Form EC8A at the polling unit.
Earlier this month, the Senate passed its version of the amendment bill. However, it rejected mandatory real-time electronic transmission. The decision sparked protests and public backlash.
Last week, the Senate reversed its position. It approved electronic transmission to IReV but retained manual collation as a fallback where technology fails.
Rowdy Plenary Session
Tensions rose during Tuesday’s plenary when Francis Waive, chairman of the House Committee on Rules and Business, moved a motion to rescind the chamber’s earlier decision on the bill.
When Tajudeen Abbas, speaker of the house, put the motion to a voice vote, the “nays” appeared louder than the “ayes.” However, Abbas ruled in favour of the “ayes.”
The ruling triggered protests. Lawmakers shouted in objection.
Abbas then called for an executive session. Members rejected the proposal.
Despite the resistance, the speaker moved the House into an executive session. Opposition lawmakers then walked out while chanting “APC ole” inside the chamber.
