Minority members of the House of Representatives on Tuesday staged a walkout from plenary after the passage of key provisions in the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2025, accusing the majority of prioritizing partisan interests over electoral integrity.
The protest followed the adoption of Clause 60(3), which provides for both real-time electronic transmission and manual transmission of election results, as well as Clause 84, which prescribes modes of candidate nomination by political parties.
The House had earlier rescinded its December 2025 passage of the amendment bill to address identified inconsistencies before recommitting it to the Committee of the Whole for clause-by-clause consideration. However, deliberations quickly became contentious.
Dispute over result transmission
On Clause 60(3), Rep. Bamidele Salam moved a motion seeking the deletion of the provision allowing manual transmission of results, arguing that elections should be transmitted electronically without exceptions. The motion was seconded by Minority Leader Rep. Kingsley Chinda.
When the matter was put to a voice vote, the “nays” prevailed, thereby retaining both manual and real-time electronic transmission in the proposed law.
The outcome drew sharp reactions from minority lawmakers, who later exited the chamber to brief journalists.
“Our position is that elections shall and should be transmitted electronically,” Chinda said. “We are against any clause that would give room for micro-manipulation, rigging, or leeway for any untoward act.”
He disclosed that the minority caucus had proposed that in the event of a conflict between manually collated Form EC8A results and electronically transmitted results, the electronically transmitted version should prevail.
“Those positions were torn down,” he said. “And we are aware that they were torn down by members of the APC, not on grounds of patriotism, but on grounds of political party affiliation.”
Chinda described the walkout as a deliberate move to formally register their objection before the public.
“For us, after what happened on the floor, we felt it was better to register our position with Nigeria, which is the court of public opinion,” he added.
Debate over party primaries
The minority also opposed the adoption of Clause 84, which deals with the conduct of party primaries and the method of candidate selection.
According to Chinda, the caucus believes the choice between direct primaries, indirect primaries or consensus arrangements should remain strictly an internal matter for political parties.
“Our position remains that the method of selection of candidates should be an internal party affair,” he said. “Political parties should be allowed to determine what method they want to adopt in selecting candidates that will represent them.”
He argued that imposing a specific mode of primaries would amount to undue interference in party administration.
Despite the protest, the House proceeded with the amendments, setting the stage for further political debate as the country moves closer to the 2027 general elections.
The development highlights deep partisan divisions within the Green Chamber over the direction of Nigeria’s electoral reforms, with minority lawmakers vowing to continue mobilizing public opinion against provisions they say could undermine transparency and internal party democracy.
