The House of Representatives was thrown into disarray on Tuesday following a heated disagreement over a motion seeking to rescind the passage of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill.
The drama unfolded during plenary when Francis Waive, Chairman of the House Committee on Rules and Business, moved a motion urging the chamber to reverse its earlier approval of the bill, which was passed on December 23, 2025.
Speaker Tajudeen Abbas put the motion to a voice vote, but confusion erupted almost immediately. Although the “nays” appeared to be louder than the “ayes,” the Speaker ruled in favour of the motion, declaring that the ayes had carried the day.
The ruling sparked an uproar among lawmakers, many of whom shouted in protest and challenged the Speaker’s decision. The chamber quickly descended into a rowdy atmosphere, with members visibly divided over the move.
In a bid to calm tensions, Abbas proposed that the House move into an executive session to deliberate further on the matter. However, the suggestion was also resisted by several lawmakers. Despite the objections, the Speaker proceeded to usher members into a closed-door session.
The controversy centres on provisions of the Electoral Act Amendment Bill relating to the electronic transmission of election results.
When the House passed the bill in December, it adopted a clause mandating the real-time electronic transmission of results from each polling unit to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) Result Viewing Portal (IReV).
The provision states that the presiding officer shall electronically transmit results to the IReV portal immediately after the prescribed Form EC8A has been signed and stamped, and countersigned where applicable by candidates or their agents at the polling unit.
However, the Senate initially rejected the proposal for compulsory real-time electronic transmission when it considered the bill earlier this month, triggering criticism from civil society organisations and election reform advocates.
On Tuesday, the upper legislative chamber reversed its earlier stance and approved electronic transmission of results, albeit with a condition that manual collation should serve as a backup in cases where technological failures occur.
The conflicting positions of both chambers have led to the constitution of a conference committee tasked with harmonising the differences in their respective versions of the bill. Apart from the transmission clause, other areas of divergence remain.
Civil society groups have called on the National Assembly to uphold the House’s earlier position, insisting that real-time electronic transmission of results is vital for enhancing transparency and credibility in Nigeria’s electoral process.