Instead, he said the debate in the Senate is focused on whether the law should mandate “real-time” electronic transmission, warning that such rigidity could create legal and logistical problems during elections.
According to a report by The Punch on Sunday, February 8, 2026, Akpabio made the clarification while responding to mounting criticism from civil society groups and political commentators who fear that proposed amendments could weaken transparency in future elections.
He insisted that the Senate is not abolishing electronic transmission but is seeking to provide flexibility for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to determine the most practical method of transmitting results based on prevailing circumstances.
Akpabio explained that elections in Nigeria are conducted under vastly different conditions across the country, with some areas enjoying strong network coverage and others struggling with poor or nonexistent connectivity.
In his view, compelling INEC to transmit results electronically in real time, regardless of local realities, could expose the electoral process to unnecessary risks.
“The issue is not about removing electronic transmission,” Akpabio said. “It is about whether you want to make real-time transmission compulsory, even when the network is down or unavailable.”
He argued that making real-time electronic transmission mandatory could lead to serious legal complications.
According to him, political actors could exploit technical failures, such as network outages, to challenge election results in court, even when voting and counting were otherwise credible.
The Senate President stressed that the amendments under consideration are designed to empower INEC with discretion, allowing the electoral body to choose the most feasible and secure method of transmitting results at any given time.
He maintained that such flexibility would protect the integrity of elections rather than weaken it.
To illustrate his point, Akpabio used a striking and controversial analogy that has since gone viral.
“If you want to use a bicycle to carry your votes from one polling unit to the ward centre, do so,” he said.
The remark, though informal, was meant to emphasize that the law should not prescribe a single mode of transmission, especially one that depends entirely on technology.
According to Akpabio, the essence of election law should be reliability and verifiability, not the imposition of a particular technological method.
He argued that as long as results are securely and accurately conveyed from polling units to collation centres, the means of transmission should remain a secondary consideration.
He also took aim at critics of the proposed amendments, accusing some commentators of misunderstanding the legislative process.
Akpabio described them as “mouth legislators,” suggesting that they were rushing to conclusions without carefully examining the details of the bill or waiting for the final version to emerge.
“The lawmaking process is not completed yet,” he said. “People are already shouting without seeing the final outcome.”
Akpabio further warned that an inflexible real-time transmission requirement could disenfranchise voters in remote or underserved areas.
He noted that elections conducted in places with poor connectivity or during system-wide outages could be declared invalid purely on technical grounds, despite the will of the voters being clearly expressed.
0 Comments