Nigeria presents a paradox worth examining. The country has built a thriving digital ecosystem. POS terminals function reliably in remote villages and even in areas controlled by armed groups, while millions seamlessly register for national examinations online. Over 140 million Nigerians are connected to the internet, and more than 170 million carry active SIM cards. These networks support complex transactions daily, yet when it comes to electoral transparency, the nation’s leadership balks at full electronic result transmission.
This contradiction is telling. If criminals can coordinate operations across networks with confidence, and ordinary Nigerians can complete financial and educational transactions without hesitation, why do electoral authorities and government officials resist the same technology for voting?
The Credibility Question
President Bola Tinubu’s All Progressives Congress (APC) controls approximately 30 governorships and maintains significant political dominance nationwide. From this position of strength, one would expect confidence in transparent systems. Instead, the administration and its allies in the Senate have resisted mandatory electronic voting, citing impracticality a claim that rings hollow against global precedent.
Countries like Estonia and India have successfully implemented electronic voting at scale. These examples demolish the excuse that technology cannot handle Nigeria’s population.
The real question becomes: if the ruling party is as electorally dominant as it claims, what does it fear from a system that would reduce manipulation, minimize disputes, and eliminate human error? The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) already proved that electronic systems work in Nigeria’s electoral context.
Why Is Tinubu Reluctant to Go Fully Electronic?
Several interpretations emerge from this hesitation:
• Control and Discretion: Traditional paper-based systems with manual result compilation allow for pressure points where outcomes can be influenced. Electronic transmission removes these opportunities for manipulation at the state or local level, leaving no room for “adjustment” between the polling unit and national tallying centers.
• Institutional Inertia: Powerful interests within the electoral commission and political machinery have vested stakes in the current system. Electronic voting disrupts established networks and reduces opportunities for unofficial coordination between officials and politicians.
• Unfounded Distrust of Technology: Despite Nigerians’ daily reliance on digital systems, some policymakers harbor irrational fears about cybersecurity or system failure concerns that apply equally to banking and telecommunications, yet are somehow more acute when democracy is at stake.
• Political Calculation: There may be concern that full transparency could reveal electoral patterns that contradict the ruling party’s claimed dominance, or that electronic results might not align with behind-the-scenes arrangements made before election day.
The Youth Demand for Accountability
Nigerian youth have made their position clear through peaceful protest and civic engagement.
Movements demanding electoral reform represent not unrest, but constructive pressure for democratic accountability. When young Nigerians insist on transparent, technology-enabled elections, they are not being unreasonable they are pointing out a glaring inconsistency in their government’s stance.
To dismiss these demands as impractical insults the intelligence of a population that manages complex digital transactions daily. To ignore them risks further erosion of institutional trust at a moment when democracy depends on public confidence.
The Path Forward
With the 2027 elections approaching, President Tinubu has an opportunity to redefine his legacy. True leadership would embrace electronic result transmission not as a threat to the APC’s dominance but as proof of confidence in democratic integrity. A government secure in its electoral support should welcome, indeed, champion the transparency that technology provides.
The contrast is stark: if bandits can coordinate across networks flawlessly, if students can register for national exams without friction, if millions conduct financial transactions securely online, then surely votes can be transmitted electronically The hesitation serves only to fuel suspicion and undermine confidence in democratic institutions.
Confidence in democracy should demand transparency, not resist it. If the APC truly holds the strength it claims, electronic voting becomes not a risk but a vindication. The delay is costlyand the cost is trust itself.
E-signed: Hon. Comrade James Onifade
Advocate for Good Governance and A Better Judicial System
