Senate President Godswill Akpabio’s recent defense of removing “real-time” electronic transmission from the Electoral Act amendment reveals troubling gaps in reasoning that warrant closer examination.
At the heart of Akpabio’s argument lies a claim that over nine states lack network coverage, making real-time transmission impractical.
EDITOR’S PICKS
EKO HOT BLOG observed that this assertion is both factually questionable and strategically inconsistent with Nigeria’s current digital infrastructure reality.
The Network Coverage Paradox
Speaking at a book launch over the weekend, Akpabio claimed that transmitting in real time meant that, “in over nine states, where networks are not working because of insecurity, there will be no election results.”
However, the senate president’s network deficit claim conflicts with observable evidence across Nigeria. Point of Sale (POS) machines operate extensively throughout the country, including in rural areas. These devices require the same mobile network infrastructure that would support electoral result transmission.
If traders in remote markets can process cashless transactions, the assertion that electoral officers cannot upload results from the same locations becomes difficult to justify.
This paradox exposes a fundamental weakness in the Senate’s position: the technology infrastructure already exists and functions commercially across regions Akpabio suggests are unreachable.
The Perfect Solution Fallacy
Moreover, the senate president’s argument commits what policy analysts call the “perfect solution fallacy” — rejecting a beneficial reform because it cannot be implemented universally. Even accepting his premise that some areas lack coverage, this does not justify preventing transmission where infrastructure exists.
Electoral reform need not be uniformly applicable to be valuable. Accommodations can easily be made: areas with network coverage transmit electronically while locations with genuine connectivity challenges use alternative methods.
This hybrid approach, already practiced in various countries, would significantly enhance transparency for the majority of polling units while maintaining backup protocols.
The Starlink Solution
Akpabio’s infrastructure argument becomes weaker still when considering the substantial budget of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) and available technology. Starlink satellite internet services, operational in Nigeria, offer connectivity independent of terrestrial network infrastructure. Deploying these devices to the limited areas genuinely lacking coverage would cost a fraction of INEC’s electoral budget.
The commission spent billions on the 2023 elections. Allocating resources for Starlink units in underserved areas represents a minimal investment relative to the transparency gains. That this obvious solution remains unaddressed in Akpabio’s defense suggests the network argument may be more convenient than genuine.
The National Grid Red Herring
Perhaps most puzzling is Akpabio’s invocation of national grid collapse as justification against real-time transmission. This reveals either a misunderstanding of technology or a deliberately misleading argument.
Network connectivity and electricity supply are separate systems. Mobile networks operate on backup power and remain functional during grid failures as evidenced by continued phone and internet service during Nigeria’s frequent power outages. Result transmission devices would similarly function during blackouts, either through battery power or alternative charging methods.
Moreover, Akpabio’s casual reference to grid collapse as a planning consideration inadvertently highlights a troubling acceptance of infrastructure failure as normal. In functional countries, systemic power failures are not anticipated contingencies in electoral planning, they are problems to be solved.
The Transparency Question
Underlying these technical objections is a more fundamental issue: real-time transmission serves transparency, not just convenience. The Supreme Court ruling Akpabio cited addressed legal requirements, not best practices. Just because courts validated elections without real-time transmission does not mean the reform lacks value.
Electronic transmission reduces opportunities for result manipulation during transit from polling units to collation centres. The current manual system, which Akpabio defends, has historically been vulnerable to alteration. Real-time transmission would not eliminate all electoral irregularities, but it would close a significant vulnerability.
Essentially, the Senate’s arguments against real-time transmission crumble under scrutiny.
Network coverage exists more widely than claimed, technological solutions exist for genuine gaps, and the grid collapse argument reflects either technical confusion or rhetorical misdirection. When legislators invoke infrastructure limitations while simultaneously witnessing that same infrastructure support commercial transactions nationwide, citizens have reason to question whether technical concerns or political calculations drive opposition to electoral transparency reforms.
FURTHER READING
The burden of proof rests with those resisting transparency, not those advocating it. On this measure, the Senate’s case remains unconvincing.
Philip Ibitoye is a Special Correspondent with EKO HOT BLOG. Click here to find daily analysis and critical insight on trending issues in Lagos and other parts of Nigeria.
Click to watch the video of the week below:
