Reps amend Electoral Act to clarify pre-election jurisdiction, allow e-service of petitions

The development comes months after President Bola Tinubu assented to the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2026, which made the electronic transmission of election results optional.

The House of Representatives on Wednesday passed fresh amendments to the Electoral Act, introducing new provisions to clarify jurisdiction in pre-election disputes and to allow technology-driven service of election petition processes.

The bills, presented by Adebayo Balogun (APC, Lagos) on behalf of the Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu, were debated and adopted during plenary presided over by Mr Kalu.

The latest changes come amid continuing legislative adjustments to Nigeria’s electoral framework, following months of controversy over earlier amendments to the law.

One of the newly passed amendments at Wednesday’s plenary seeks to address persistent legal uncertainty over the appropriate courts for filing pre-election cases.

Mr Balogun explained that the bill amends Section 29(5) of the principal law to expand the grounds on which aspirants can institute suits challenging false information submitted by candidates.

Under the revised provision, such cases may now be filed either in the Federal Capital Territory or in the jurisdiction where the cause of action arose, a move intended to ease access to justice and reduce procedural delays.

The bill also introduces a new Section 29A to clearly define jurisdiction across different categories of pre-election disputes. Under the framework, disputes relating to the National Assembly, state Houses of Assembly, and governorship elections will originate in the Federal High Court, with appeals to the Court of Appeal.

In contrast, pre-election matters concerning presidential elections will commence at the Court of Appeal, which will exercise original jurisdiction, with further appeals lying to the Supreme Court.

To eliminate conflicting judicial decisions, the amendment expressly bars any court from entertaining pre-election matters outside those specified.

Mr Balogun noted that the overall objective is to “streamline adjudication, ensure speedy dispensation of justice and strengthen the integrity of the electoral process.”

Electronic service of petitions introduced

In a separate amendment, the House approved provisions to modernise the service of election petition processes by incorporating electronic communication.

The bill requires candidates, upon submitting nomination forms, to provide verifiable physical addresses alongside functional electronic contact details, such as email addresses and telephone numbers. This is to ensure that parties to election disputes can be reached through multiple reliable channels.

It also revises the First Schedule to the Act to recognise electronic service as legally valid. Under the new provision, election petition processes can be served personally, by registered post, or by electronic means, including email, SMS, and other digital platforms linked to the respondent.

The amendment provides that service by electronic means is valid once proof of transmission is provided, such as delivery confirmations or server-generated records. It further clarifies that a recipient’s failure to access or acknowledge such communication does not invalidate the service once dispatch has been established.

In addition, the law broadens the definition of “electronic means” to accommodate evolving communication technologies capable of generating verifiable records, reflecting what lawmakers described as the need to align electoral adjudication with modern realities.

Debate

During the debate, Abdussamad Dasuki (ADC, Sokoto) raised concerns about the reliability of electronic communication, warning about the risks of scams and the uncertainty of message delivery.

He questioned the consistency of expanding digital processes in election litigation, given that broader electoral technology issues remain contentious.

Responding, Mr Kalu said the amendment does not abolish existing methods but merely expands available options. He noted that electronic communication is already widely used in sectors such as banking and should not be excluded from legal processes.

Mr Balogun also clarified that candidates would be required to provide contact details they consider reliable for the election period, thereby reducing disputes over failed service. Mr Kalu added that parties remain free to choose manual or electronic means of communication, stressing that “as a society, we must evolve.”

Second Amendment amid lingering controversy

The latest legislative action marks the second amendment to the electoral law within the last five months, following intense debate over the transmission of election results.

In December, the National Assembly passed an earlier version of the amendment bill that made the electronic transmission of election results from polling units to the Independent National Electoral Commission’s (INEC) Result Viewing Portal (IReV) mandatory immediately after vote counting.

However, the Senate, led by Godswill Akpabio, rejected the mandatory provision and retained the position in the Electoral Act 2022, which allows results to be transmitted to collation centres without making electronic transmission compulsory.

The Senate’s stance drew criticism from many Nigerians and civil society groups, who argued that mandatory electronic transmission would enhance transparency and reduce electoral manipulation.

Amid the backlash, the Senate revisited the issue in February and reaffirmed that electronic transmission would remain optional. The revised provision included a caveat that, in the event of internet connectivity failure, Form EC8A would serve as the primary basis for result collation.

Form EC8A is the official document completed by presiding officers at polling units immediately after votes are counted. It is often a critical piece of evidence in election petitions because it represents the earliest recorded results at the source.

Despite the adjustment, some stakeholders remained dissatisfied with the optional approach and the reliance on manual documentation.

Mr Akpabio later confirmed that the Senate would maintain its position, keeping electronic transmission optional. The House of Representatives, which had initially passed a version mandating electronic transmission, subsequently reversed its stance and aligned with the Senate’s position.

Presidential assent

Following the harmonisation of positions by both chambers, President Bola Tinubu assented to the Electoral Act Amendment Bill 2026 in February, after months of debate and legislative back-and-forth.

With the presidential assent, the amended law, comprising about 154 clauses, has come into force and will guide the conduct of subsequent elections in Nigeria.

However, Clause 60, which makes electronic transmission of election results optional, remains the most contentious aspect of the law, reflecting the broader national debate over the role of technology in Nigeria’s electoral process.

The fresh amendments passed on Wednesday are therefore seen as part of a continuing effort by lawmakers to refine the legal framework, address operational gaps and strengthen the credibility of electoral dispute resolution in the country.