Opinions

How Akpabio’s Leadership Secured Nigeria’s Electoral Future, by Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh

For the first time since independence in 1960, electronic viewing of polling unit results is explicitly grounded in statutory authority.

Published

9 months ago

February 20, 2026

OCHEFA

419 Views

• Senate’s President, Godswill Akpabio

IN the evolving story of Nigeria’s democratic consolidation, few issues have provoked as much intensity as electoral reform.

The signing into law of the Electoral Act (Repeal and Re-enactment) Bill 2026 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu marked another chapter in this journey, drawing applause, skepticism, and fierce debate in equal measure.

At the centre of this moment stands Godswill Akpabio, President of the Senate, who has consistently articulated a position that blends institutional caution with reformist intent.

His assertion that the National Assembly met “the aspirations of Nigerians, not a few people who make noise” reflects not merely rhetorical flourish, but a deeper philosophy of lawmaking anchored in constitutionalism, legislative procedure, and national peculiarities.

To understand Akpabio’s positioning, one must situate the reform within Nigeria’s broader democratic trajectory. Since the country’s return to civilian rule in 1999, electoral reforms have often oscillated between technological optimism and structural reality.

The 2026 re-enactment does not discard innovation; rather, it recalibrates it.

In defending the new Act, Akpabio emphasised that the National Assembly undertook a “painstaking” and “thorough” process, mindful of the country’s infrastructural limitations, judicial precedents, and the ultimate objective of preventing disenfranchisement.

A key flashpoint in the debate was the question of electronic transmission of results. For many reform advocates, real-time electronic transmission became symbolic of transparency.

Yet Akpabio’s argument was not against technology; it was against rigidity detached from capacity.

He consistently maintained that technology must serve democracy, not endanger it.

In a country where broadband penetration is uneven, where insecurity disrupts network infrastructure across multiple states, and where power supply remains inconsistent, embedding inflexible “real-time” mandates into statute could, in his view, expose elections to avoidable litigations and invalidation.

This perspective aligns with the constitutional role of the legislature.

The Senate does not conduct elections; it makes laws.

The responsibility for operational modalities rests with the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which applies the law within its administrative and technical capacity.

By leaving room for INEC to determine timing and modalities of transmission, the Act reflects a respect for institutional boundaries.

Whether history ultimately vindicates every provision of the 2026 Act will depend on future elections. But as of its enactment, the legislative record reflects a deliberate attempt to harmonize innovation with stability.

Akpabio’s defense of this approach underscores his insistence that Parliament legislate for posterity, not for transient political advantage.

At the State House signing ceremony, President Tinubu reinforced this institutional clarity.

He observed that Nigeria’s elections remain “essentially manual.”

Ballots are cast manually, counted manually, and declared by human beings.

While electronic viewing enhances transparency, the core process remains human-centered.

Tinubu’s caution about broadband readiness and cyber vulnerabilities echoes Akpabio’s reasoning.

Together, their statements project a governance philosophy that privileges clarity and feasibility over performative reform.

Perhaps the most celebrated innovation in the new Act is the formal legal recognition of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) result viewer, commonly referred to as IReV. This recognition represents a significant milestone.

For the first time since independence in 1960, electronic viewing of polling unit results is explicitly grounded in statutory authority.

Under the amended framework, results transmitted electronically—even if delayed due to connectivity issues—must ultimately reflect on the IReV portal once network is restored. This creates a verifiable digital trail that citizens, observers, and parties can scrutinize and interrogate.

Akpabio described this as a landmark safeguard against a historic problem: tampering between polling units and collation centres.

By ensuring that Form EC8A—the primary polling unit result form signed by presiding officers and party agents—feeds into a publicly accessible portal, the law strengthens accountability without discarding manual collation procedures validated by courts.

The Supreme Court’s pronouncements in post-2023 election litigation had clarified that IReV, as previously configured, was not the definitive legal record of results.

Rather than ignore this judicial interpretation, the legislature responded by integrating electronic viewing into statutory text while preserving the evidentiary primacy of signed result forms.

This harmonization of law and jurisprudence illustrates legislative maturity.Critics, including the opposition parties, alleged that the Act’s signing reflected partisan fear.

Civil society voices such as Yiaga Africa described the reform as incremental where transformation was needed. Yet even among critics, a pragmatic thread emerged.

The Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre and the Transition Monitoring Group urged acceptance of the law while focusing attention on demanding credible conduct from INEC.

This convergence suggests that while disagreements persist about optimal reform design, there is recognition that institutional strengthening is iterative.

Akpabio’s stance during earlier debates further illuminates his approach.

On February 8, at a public presentation of Senator Effiong Bob’s book in Abuja, he cautioned against hasty conclusions about an amendment process still underway.

His insistence that commentators wait until Votes and Proceedings were finalized before passing judgment reflects a proceduralist ethos. Legislative drafting is iterative.

Clauses are debated, amended, harmonised between chambers, and only then crystallised into final text.

By defending this process against what he termed premature media trials, Akpabio positioned himself as a guardian of institutional integrity.His critique of “retreat politics” is equally telling.

Consultative retreats, he argued, are valuable but not binding.

Final authority rests on the Senate floor, where clauses are debated and voted upon. This distinction reinforces parliamentary sovereignty within Nigeria’s constitutional framework.

It also shows a deeper democratic principle: advocacy informs lawmaking, but elected representatives deliberate and decide.

Another noteworthy provision in the amended Act concerns internal party democracy.

By empowering party members to vote directly for candidates during primaries, the law dilutes the dominance of small delegate blocs.

In theory, this broadens participation, reduces transactional politics, and enhances legitimacy.

Akpabio’s highlighting of this reform signals an understanding that electoral integrity begins within parties, not merely at polling units.

The Act also addresses scenarios where leading candidates are disqualified by courts. Mandating fresh elections in such circumstances, it prevents outcomes where significantly lower-polling candidates assume office by default.

This provision closes a loophole that had generated controversy in past cycles. In doing so, the legislature strengthens the moral authority of electoral outcomes.

The reduction of statutory notice for elections from 360 days to 300 days, may appear technical but carries practical implications.

It allows scheduling flexibility, including the possibility of avoiding sensitive religious periods such as Ramadan and Lent.

This demonstrates legislative sensitivity to socio-cultural realities—a recurring theme in Akpabio’s rhetoric about Nigeria’s peculiarities.

Opposition criticisms deserve engagement.

The PDP characterized the signing as hurried and partisan.

Yet the legislative timeline reflects deliberation across chambers, conference committee harmonisation, and eventual executive assent.

Moreover, the principle of legislative-executive cooperation is intrinsic to constitutional governance. The swift assent by President Tinubu can be interpreted not as haste but as responsiveness to parliamentary consensus.

Support from figures like Nyesom Wike reinforces the perception that the reform commands cross-sectional backing within the governing architecture.

Wike’s description of democracy as a “work-in-progress” aligns with Akpabio’s incrementalist philosophy. Reform, in this view, is evolutionary rather than revolutionary.

Central to Akpabio’s defense is the rejection of absolutism.

Mandating real-time electronic transmission in a context of infrastructural fragility could render entire states’ results vulnerable to nullification due to network outages.

He invoked comparative examples, including electoral disputes in advanced democracies, to illustrate that even technologically sophisticated systems encounter anomalies.

The lesson he draws is humility: laws must anticipate worst-case scenarios.

This caution is not synonymous with conservatism. By embedding IReV recognition in statute, the Act advances transparency beyond previous frameworks.

It creates a hybrid model—manual voting and collation complemented by electronic visibility. Such hybridity may represent a uniquely Nigerian pathway, blending global best practices with domestic constraints.

Akpabio’s rhetorical framing—distinguishing “noise” from lawmaking—has attracted attention.

While critics may interpret it as dismissive, it also speaks to a tension in contemporary democracies: the amplification of vocal minorities through media ecosystems. Legislative legitimacy, however, derives from electoral mandate and constitutional procedure.

By emphasizing the “generality of Nigerians,” Akpabio situates himself within a majoritarian democratic theory tempered by rule of law.The question of disenfranchisement further illuminates his position.

If technological failure in insecure or rural areas invalidated results, marginalized communities could bear disproportionate impact.

By allowing delayed electronic uploads once connectivity is restored, the Act seeks to reconcile inclusivity with transparency.

This compromise reflects distributive sensitivity.

In evaluating Akpabio’s stewardship, one must also consider his broader legislative philosophy.

He repeatedly asserts that laws must outlast individuals. This intergenerational perspective discourages tailoring statutes to immediate partisan contests.

Whether one agrees with every clause, the emphasis on durability highlights a statesmanlike orientation.The reactions from civil society, though critical, implicitly acknowledge the dynamic nature of reform.

Calls to continue advocating improvements indicate that the 2026 Act is part of an ongoing process. Akpabio himself has stated that doors remain open. This openness suggests confidence rather than defensiveness.

Ultimately, the measure of electoral reform lies not only in statutory text but in implementation.

INEC’s capacity, political party behaviour, judicial adjudication, and citizen vigilance will shape outcomes. Yet legislation provides the framework within which these actors operate.

By integrating electronic viewing, clarifying collation hierarchies, strengthening internal party democracy, and closing disqualification loopholes, the National Assembly has recalibrated that framework.

In positioning Akpabio in a favourable light, it is important to avoid hagiography. Democratic leadership entails contestation.

However, his consistent themes—respect for process, infrastructural realism, institutional boundaries, and posterity—form a coherent narrative. Rather than capitulate to populist maximalism or resist reform altogether, he charted a middle course.

Nigeria’s democracy, like many across the globe, navigates between aspiration and capacity.

Technological for determinism offers seductive simplicity; constitutional prudence demands complexity.

In the crucible of electoral reform, Akpabio has presented himself as a custodian of that prudence.

Whether history ultimately vindicates every provision of the 2026 Act will depend on future elections. But as of its enactment, the legislative record reflects a deliberate attempt to harmonise innovation with stability.

The broader democratic project requires precisely this balance.

Transparency without feasibility breeds litigation. Feasibility without transparency breeds distrust.

By embedding electronic visibility within a manual backbone, the Act seeks equilibrium. In championing this architecture, Akpabio aligns himself with a vision of reform that is incremental yet substantive, cautious yet forward-moving.

As Nigeria approaches future electoral cycles, the real test will be whether citizens experience greater confidence, fewer disputes, and clearer outcomes.

Should that occur, the painstaking deliberations defended by the Senate President may be remembered not as noise, but as necessary groundwork.

In that sense, Akpabio’s insistence that lawmaking differ from clamor may prove less a rebuke than a reminder: democracy flourishes not only through passion, but through patient construction of rules capable of enduring the storms of politics.

Nigeria’s Electoral Future shall have Senator Godswill Akpabio positively mentioned in its repository.

• Rt Hon Eseme Eyiboh is the Special Adviser on Media/Publicity and official Spokesperson to the President of the Senate.

Up Next

IWD: 50 rights female gender should enjoy

Don't Miss

Beyond the Noise: Godswill Akpabio and the Architecture of Stability

Click to comment

Opinions

Tinubu Built Nothing but Solar Farm for Aso Rock While Nigerians Suffer — ADC-PCC

Published

7 days ago

October 30, 2026

Charles Flames

90 Views

The African Democratic Congress Presidential Campaign Council (ADC-PCC) has described as an insult to Nigerians the statement credited to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, through his Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, declaring that “The Question Is What We Build, Not How Much We Borrow.”

In a statement issued in Abuja by its Director of Media and Publicity, Kola Ologbondiyan, the ADC-PCC challenged President Tinubu to identify what his administration has actually built with the mountain of loans accumulated since assuming office in 2023. The council insisted that Nigerians have seen little or no tangible returns on the country’s growing debt burden.

Ologbondiyan said it was particularly disturbing that Mr Onanuga would attempt to dress the President in borrowed garments by speaking about infrastructure and development when the administration has failed to demonstrate commensurate achievements despite unprecedented borrowing.

He alleged that the only visible project associated with the administration’s concern for electricity is a solar farm installed to guarantee power supply within the comfort of the Presidential Villa, while millions of Nigerians continue to grapple with unreliable electricity.

“For three and a half wasted years, the Tinubu government has borrowed without restraint and built nothing. No value, no legacy, no impact,” Ologbondiyan stated.

“Except for projects inherited from the late President Muhammadu Buhari, many of the projects being advertised by the Tinubu administration are nothing but audio projects. They exist only on paper, as conceptual designs or as announcements on newspaper pages and television screens. Under Tinubu, virtually every project exists in a press statement.

“Where is the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway? Audio. Where is the Sokoto-Badagry Superhighway? Audio. Where is the Trans-Sahara Superhighway? Audio. Where are the promised electricity grid upgrades? All propaganda, no commensurate progress, just media hype from Bayo Onanuga and his team.

“Even the Abuja-Kaduna-Kano Highway, awarded more than eight years ago, remains a source of concern to motorists. Its prolonged construction and delays tell the story of APC governance.

“Mr President must wake up and confront the reality facing Nigerians, if there is still time left between now and January 16. Citizens are hungry and enduring excruciating hardship. People are dying from hunger, insecurity and deprivation, while the government remains preoccupied with propaganda and self-congratulatory statements. These are the real signposts of what the Tinubu administration has built in almost four years.

“Today, ministries are barely functioning, agencies are struggling, and critical directorates are failing to deliver. Nigeria is practically comatose.

“The Tinubu Presidency came into power without a convincing blueprint or workable ideas and, after almost four years, has offered Nigerians little beyond failure, hardship, poverty and insecurity.

“If borrowing is truly for development, let President Tinubu show Nigerians one tangible project his administration has delivered with its trillions of naira in loans, beyond the solar farm in the Presidential Villa. The only thing this administration has successfully built is hardship.

“We appeal to international donors, development partners and financial institutions to exercise greater scrutiny and insist on accountability, transparency and prudence before extending further loans to Nigeria.

“Borrowing is not inherently wrong when the benefits translate into improved living conditions for citizens. What is unacceptable is a situation in which the country continues to accumulate debts without corresponding benefits for the people.

“Nigerians must not be compelled to continue financing the luxury, profligacy and privileged lifestyle of those in power while ordinary citizens wallow in poverty. Future generations should not be burdened with debts incurred without demonstrable benefits to them.

“The National Assembly must rise to its constitutional responsibility and save the country from being mortgaged through indiscriminate borrowings. It must stop acting as a rubber stamp for every loan request and defend the economic future of Nigeria.

“History will not forgive the 10th National Assembly if it stands by while the country is plunged deeper into a cycle of unsustainable indebtedness.”

Opinions

Human Capital Africa Statement For International Day of the Girl Child 2026

UNICEFs 2026 estimates show that about one in five girls worldwide is married before 18.

Published

4 weeks ago

October 12, 2026

OCHEFA

166 Views

Image credit : UN

By Obiageli ObyEzekwesili

A girl who learns is a girl who is not a bride.

Today the world is asked to end child marriage and invest in girls rights.

I join that call wearing three hats: as a member of the advisory council behind Columbia University’s report Accelerating Efforts to End Child Marriage; as Civil Society Representative on the Steering Committee of the African Unions Decade of Accelerated Action for the Transformation of Education and Skills Development in Africa (20252034); and as the leader of Human Capital Africa, an organisation that has spent years arguing that Africas human capital crisis begins in the early-grade classroom.

The numbers are clear.

UNICEFs 2026 estimates show that about one in five girls worldwide is married before 18.

That adds up to roughly 650 million women and girls alive today who were married as children.

More than 12 million girls are still married each year, about one every three seconds, and sub-Saharan Africa has the highest prevalence at 31 per cent

.In Nigeria, 23.6 million women and girls were married before 18, the largest number in West and Central Africa.

In parts of the North the situation is a national emergency: in Jigawa, 78 per cent of women were first married before 18, and 63 per cent of women left school to marry.

The cost of inaction is high. Our Columbia report includes new analysis by the Center for Global Development.

It estimates losses of up to $175 billion a year, or almost $2.5 trillion by 2040, from lost productivity and higher health risks caused by child marriage.

The report also warns that aid cuts, weakening global commitment to womens rights, and rising conflict could slow or reverse progress.

Child marriage is not a side issue in development. It drains a nations human capital directly.Progress is possible.

An estimated 68 million child marriages have been averted over the past 25 years, through girls education, legal reform and social protection.

In parts of the North the situation is a national emergency: in Jigawa, 78 per cent of women were first married before 18, and 63 per cent of women left school to marry.

The evidence on what works is strong: Each year of secondary education lowers a girls chance of marrying before 18 by five percentage points or more.

In Niger, when the government removed the direct costs of middle school for rural girls, each additional year in secondary school was associated with a 19 percentage point lower probability of marriage.

If every African girl completed secondary education, child marriage could be almost eliminated.

Where HCAs mission and this campaign meet.

A girl cannot stay in secondary school if she never learned to read.

Today, 89 per cent of children in sub-Saharan Africa are in learning poverty, unable to read and understand a simple text by age ten.

A girl who cannot read by ten falls behind, then drops out.

Once she is out of school, she is at the greatest risk of marriage. That is why we say schooling is not learning.

Foundational literacy and numeracy are the first and cheapest protection a girl has.

At the Columbia launch I said that community programmes and advocacy are not enough on their own. Governments must lead.

On this Day of the Girl, Human Capital Africa calls on African governments to:

1. Make foundational learning a girl-protection policy. Every girl should be reading with comprehension by age ten, using proven methods such as structured pedagogy and Teaching at the Right Level.

2. Guarantee the move into secondary school. Remove fees, uniform and transport costs for girls, especially in rural communities with high rates of child marriage.

3. Enforce 18 as the minimum age of marriage in law and in practice, in every state and every community, with traditional and religious leaders as partners.

4. Fund this domestically. As foreign aid shrinks, African budgets and African philanthropy must take over.

5. Measure and publish.

Track girls learning, their transition to secondary school, and child marriage rates in national accountability systems.

The AU Decade of Education gives Africa ten years and a continental mandate.

As a member of its Steering Committee, I will press for girlslearning and retention to be at the centre of how the Decades success is measured.

A Decade that does not end child marriage will not have transformed African education.

The Columbia report sets a realistic target: cutting child marriage prevalence from one in five to one in seven within five years.

Africa can lead the way to that target, but only if we treat every girls classroom as the place where her childhood is protected.

Any girl-child should be a student, not a bride. She should learn, then lead.

• Obiageli ObyEzekwesiliFounder, Human Capital Africa | Former Nigeria’s Minister of Education and Vice President for Africa Region, World Bank.

Opinions

The Girl Who Was Almost Married at 10 Is Taking Her Story to the United Nations

On September 4 this week…Sierra Leone’s First Lady is expected to stand before the United Nations General Assembly with a proposal aimed at protecting millions of girls from the same fate.

Published

2 months ago

September 4, 2026

OCHEFA

323 Views

• Sierra Leone’s First Lady, Fatima Maada Bio

By Ahmed Sahid Nasralla (De Monk)

AT about 10 years old, Fatima Maada Bio already knew who she was expected to marry.

She was a child, but an adult decision had been made about the direction her life should take. Somehow, she escaped that future.

On September 4 this week, many, many years after that little girl could have been sent into a marriage she did not choose, Sierra Leone’s First Lady is expected to stand before the United Nations General Assembly with a proposal aimed at protecting millions of girls from the same fate.

She is expected to present a draft resolution seeking the proclamation of November 27 as an ‘International Day for the Elimination of Child, Early and Forced Marriage’. The proposal is new.

The date is not yet an official UN observance. It is a call for the international community to give the issue a permanent place on its calendar and, with it, sustained attention and action.

There is something deeply personal about that journey.

According to briefing material from the Office of the First Lady of Sierra Leone, she knew at around the age of 10 who she was expected to marry and narrowly escaped child marriage.

That experience did not become a footnote in her life. It became part of the reason she has spent years speaking about the rights and protection of women and girls.

The First Lady’s public advocacy has taken her from communities in Sierra Leone to some of the world’s most important international forums.

Her flagship ‘Hands Off Our Girls’ campaign has focused on ending rape, early marriage and violence against women and girls, while her work has also extended into girls’ education, women’s health and other issues affecting vulnerable communities.

However, her return to the United Nations this time carries a particularly personal weight.

She is taking a subject that could have defined her own childhood and asking the international community to give it greater and lasting attention.

It is not her first attempt to put child protection on the UN agenda.

In 2022, she spearheaded the effort that led the General Assembly to proclaim November 18 as the ‘World Day for the Prevention of and Healing from Child Sexual Exploitation, Abuse and Violence’.

“She is expected to present a draft resolution seeking the proclamation of November 27 as an ‘International Day for the Elimination of Child, Early and Forced Marriage’. The proposal is new.”

UNAIDS describes her as having championed the adoption of that first-ever World Day.

The United Nations has also continued to strengthen its attention to child, early and forced marriage.

In December 2024, the General Assembly adopted a resolution addressing the issue.

Sierra Leone has been moving on the national front too. The country enacted legislation in 2024 prohibiting marriage involving anyone under 18.

So when Fatima Maada Bio walks into the General Assembly this week, she will be carrying a story that has travelled through several stages: from the experience of a young girl, to a national campaign, to legislation, and now to another attempt to secure a place for the issue on the global calendar.

The numbers behind the issue are sobering.

The United Nations and other international organisations have consistently described child marriage as a major barrier to girls’ education, health, economic opportunity and personal autonomy.

Behind every statistic, though, there is a girl whose childhood is being shortened.

There is a school she may leave, friends she may lose, choices she may never get to make, and a future that may be decided for her before she is old enough to understand what that future means. That is why the personal history of the woman making this proposal is important.

Fatima Maada Bio knows what it means for adults to imagine a future for a girl before she has had the opportunity to imagine one for herself. She also knows what it means to get away.

That gives her advocacy a particular human quality. The issue is something she encountered as a child and has carried into her public life as an adult.

The fight has also taken her beyond child marriage. Last week, OncoDaily named her among its 100 Influential Women in Oncology for 2026, recognising her work in women’s health and cancer prevention.

The publication highlighted her partnership with the Merck Foundation, which has supported specialist medical training in Sierra Leone, including scholarships that contributed to the development of the country’s cancer-care workforce.

It also noted her advocacy for breast cancer awareness and early detection and her participation in discussions around the WHO Global Breast Cancer Initiative.

It is another part of a public role that has increasingly stretched beyond the traditional image of a First Lady.

Then there is child protection, and women’s health.

There is girls’ education, and the wider question of how countries protect women and children who often have the least power over decisions affecting their lives.

The international recognition in oncology is significant for another reason.

It shows that her advocacy is being noticed in fields far removed from the political spotlight in which First Ladies are usually seen.

Nonetheless, the child-marriage campaign remains different. It brings her public work unusually close to her own childhood.

Sierra Leone, as a country, has its own reason to pay attention to what happens in New York this week.

The country has already taken the important step of outlawing marriage involving children under 18.

The First Lady has been one of the most visible voices pushing the protection of girls into the national conversation.

Her campaign has also received international recognition, including her appointment by UNAIDS as a champion for the empowerment and engagement of adolescent girls and young women.

Now she is taking the conversation back to the United Nations. The proposed international day would not, by itself, end child marriage.

A date on the UN calendar cannot keep a girl in school, or protect her from an abusive household or change the circumstances that make families vulnerable to marrying off their daughters.

Those things require laws, enforcement, education, economic opportunity, social protection and changes in attitudes that can take generations.But international days can keep issues alive.

They create opportunities for governments, schools, civil society organisations, communities and international agencies to return to a problem every year, measure progress and remind themselves of what remains unfinished. That is the opportunity behind November 27.

This may also be the reason why the story of the little girl who nearly became a child bride is worth remembering when Fatima Maada Bio enters the General Assembly. She is no longer that girl.

She got education and became a journalist, an actress, an advocate, a mother, and Sierra Leone’s First Lady. She also became the President of the Organisation of African First Ladies for Development.

She is now asking the world to give millions of girls something she was fortunate enough to have: the chance to grow up and become all of that and even more before someone else decides what their lives should become.

That is what, on behalf of Sierra Leone and the world, she is carrying into the United Nations on September 4.

Not a speech or a title. She is carrying a powerful story the General Assembly should listen and act on.

• Ahmed Sahid Nasralla is the Ex-Officio and Immediate Past President of the Sierra Leone Association of Journalists (SLAJ), and the Chairman of the Federation of African Journalists (FAJ) Working Group on Climate Change.