Minority lawmakers stage walkout over approval of manual collation of results as backup

Minority members of the House of Representatives on Tuesday staged a dramatic walkout from plenary in protest against the passage of key provisions in the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2025, accusing the majority of pushing partisan interests ahead of 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The House had earlier rescinded its December 2025 passage of the amendment bill to address identified inconsistencies before recommitting it to the Committee of the Whole for clause-by-clause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 turned contentious.

On Clause 60(3), Rep. Bamidele Salam had 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.

But when put to a voice vote, the “nays” prevailed, retaining both manual and real-time electronic transmission in the law.

The decision triggered visible anger among minority lawmakers, who later walked out of plenary to address journalists.

Addressing reporters, Rep Kingsley Chinda said the minority could not support any provision that, in their view, opens the door to manipulation of election results.

“Our position is that elections shall and should be transmitted electronically,” he declared. “We are against any clause that would give room for micro-manipulation, rigging, or leeway for any untoward act.”

He disclosed that the minority had proposed that where there is any conflict between the 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 explained that the walkout was a deliberate move to formally register their objection before Nigerians.

“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. So we had to leave the plenary. We had to walk out to address you,” he stated.

The minority also opposed the passage of Clause 84, which deals with primary elections and the method of candidate selection by political parties.

According to Chinda, the caucus maintains that the choice of whether to adopt direct primaries, indirect primaries or consensus arrangements should remain strictly an internal affair of political parties.

“Our position remains that the method of selection of candidates should be an internal party affair. Political parties should be allowed to determine what method they want to adopt in selecting candidates that will represent them,” he said.

He argued that imposing a particular mode of primaries would amount to undue interference in party administration.

“We support that parties should be allowed to adopt the method best suited for them direct primaries, indirect primaries, or consensus primaries,” he added.

Despite the protest and walkout, the House proceeded with the amendments, setting the stage for what is expected to be intense political debate as the country inches closer to the 2027 general elections.

The latest development underscores deep partisan divisions within the Green Chamber over the direction of Nigeria’s electoral reforms, with the minority vowing to continue mobilising public opinion against provisions they believe could undermine transparency and internal party democracy.