The clock is now louder than the debate.
As Nigeria edges closer to the 2027 general election, concern is mounting over the Senate’s delay in concluding work on the amended Electoral Act—despite passage by the House of Representatives and years of public consultation.
For election stakeholders, this is no longer a procedural issue. It is a timing problem with consequences.
Why the delay is drawing unusual scrutiny
Electoral reforms are not plug-and-play. Each change—whether electronic transmission of results, nomination rules, early voting, or sanctions—requires operational preparation by the electoral umpire, voter education, and legal clarity well ahead of polling day.
That is why election managers insist reforms must be finalised early. Anything less compresses planning windows and multiplies risk.
What INEC cannot afford to guess
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is legally required to publish election timetables well in advance. Without clarity on the final law, critical decisions around technology deployment, logistics, training, and dispute resolution remain suspended.
Former INEC officials, including Attahiru Jega, have repeatedly warned that late changes create confusion, invite litigation, and weaken confidence in outcomes—lessons Nigeria has already learned the hard way.
Why civil society is sounding the alarm
Groups such as the Nigerian Civil Society Situation Room argue that unresolved ambiguities in the current law contributed to disputes during the 2023 election. From result transmission to enforcement gaps, they insist that repeating the same framework risks repeating the same controversies.
Public protests at the National Assembly and statements from reform advocates underline a broader fear: that delay may be strategic rather than accidental.
The Senate’s defence — and its limits
Senate leaders maintain that careful scrutiny is essential to avoid loopholes and unintended consequences. On paper, the argument holds.
In practice, however, scrutiny loses credibility when it stretches across years—especially with the electoral calendar already in motion.
The tension, therefore, is not between speed and quality, but between preparation and procrastination.
Why lawmakers themselves are under the microscope
Analysts note that legislators are not neutral observers in electoral reform. Many are beneficiaries—or casualties—of the existing system. That reality fuels suspicion that hesitation may reflect political calculation rather than legislative caution.
Former INEC officials and political analysts have openly questioned whether the delay serves institutional integrity or personal advantage.
What the next few weeks will decide
The Senate has now constituted a committee to harmonise views and submit a consolidated report. On paper, this signals movement.
In reality, it may be the final window.
Why this matters beyond 2027
Electoral laws are not just about one election cycle. They shape trust in democracy itself. When reforms lag behind political timelines, citizens begin to doubt both intent and outcome.
What this delay quietly risks
If amendments do not arrive in time, Nigeria may head into 2027 under a legal framework already blamed for past disputes. That outcome would not just test INEC—it would test public confidence in the entire electoral process.
And once that confidence erodes, restoring it becomes far harder than passing any bill.
This is IDNN. Independent. Digital. Uncompromising.
