Stephen Ukandu, Umuahia
Amid the controversy surrounding the alleged rejection of electronic transmission of election results in the proposed Electoral Act Amendment Bill, Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, has insisted that the Senate cannot be intimidated by any individual or group.
Akpabio spoke on Saturday at the public presentation of a book authored by Senator Effiong Bob, held at the NAF Conference Centre, Abuja.
He said the Senate would not succumb to pressure or public outcry, but would instead “do what is right to give Nigerians an Electoral Act that will advance democracy.”
The Senate President described the uproar over Section 60(3) of the Bill as premature and unnecessary, stressing that the legislative process is still ongoing and far from concluded.
“We have not passed the votes and proceedings. There is still harmonisation, yet people are already appearing on television panels to abuse the Senate over something that is not yet completed,” Akpabio said.
He explained that until the votes and proceedings are adopted, senators retain the right to propose amendments.
“We have not completed the process until we approve the votes and proceedings. When that is brought out, any senator can rise to amend it. Why abuse the Senate over an incomplete process?” he queried.
Expressing displeasure over sustained media criticism, Akpabio added: “Why are people setting up panels on television to abuse us? I leave them to God.”
Apparently reacting to comments made on television by the Chief Executive Officer of the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC), Mr Clement Nwankwo, the Senate President said the legislature would not legislate to please pressure groups.
“We will not be intimidated. We will do what is right for Nigeria, not what is right for one NGO. Retreats are not lawmaking,” he stated.
He further dismissed claims that agreements reached at external forums must automatically translate into legislation.
“Why do you think that what is agreed on paper in Lagos must be approved here? I must state clearly that there is no fog or mist in the insinuations,” he said.
Clarifying what transpired during plenary, Akpabio explained that the Senate merely proposed the removal of the words ‘real-time’ to allow the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) determine the most appropriate mode of result transmission.
“If you make it mandatory and the system fails, there will be catastrophe. All we said was remove ‘real-time’ so INEC can decide,” he explained.
He stressed that the amendment process remains open, noting that further adjustments could still be made at the conference committee stage.
“The door is still open for ADC, APP and others to make adjustments. The conference committee and the votes and proceedings must still be approved before the amendment is passed,” he said.
Akpabio warned that enforcing real-time transmission in law without adequate infrastructure could undermine elections in parts of the country.
“Real-time means there will be no election results in nine states where there is no network, or where there is grid failure. That would mean no election,” he said.
He concluded by cautioning against deploying technology in a manner that could jeopardise democracy.
“Technology must save, not endanger democracy. You cannot put real-time transmission in law when there is no electricity in some communities,” Akpabio added.
