A lawmaker has raised the alarm over a provision in the Electoral Act. The claim concerns Section 63(2). The lawmaker says the clause could allow presiding officers to accept ballots without INEC security marks. If true, that would allow compromised papers into the count. The allegation has circulated, backed by footage from a House of Representatives plenary.
Nigeria has amended its Electoral Act repeatedly since 2010. Each amendment has faced disputes over ballot security, result transmission and the powers of presiding officers. In 2019, the Supreme Court nullified Zamfara results over primary irregularities. In 2023, litigants challenged result sheets and accreditation data. The 2026 alteration cycle has already produced a Supreme Court ruling restoring direct primaries and party membership registers. Ballot paper integrity has been a recurring fault line.
The footage shows a majority leader rising on a privilege matter. He cited Order 6, Rules 1 and 2. He argued that members’ legislative rights were being infringed. He presented journal records showing bills and a motion approved in July 2026. Those bills, numbered HB 2780 and 2781, had been skipped on the order paper. Later bills, up to 2792, were being listed. The stalled items dealt with electoral integrity. One motion sought to summon the INEC Chairman to brief the House on operational and funding readiness ahead of the 2027 elections. The Speaker responded that leadership had met days earlier. He said nothing sinister was behind the scheduling. He accepted the submission and promised to accommodate the bills within the legislative week.
The allegation about Section 63(2) is separate from the scheduling dispute. It is a substantive claim about the law itself. Critics say the Speaker appeared unhappy that the matter was raised. That is an interpretation of body language, not a finding.
Winners: Opposition lawmakers, who gain a platform. Civil society, which gains an issue. Critics of INEC, who gain evidence for their case. Losers: The APC, which must defend the law. INEC, whose credibility is questioned. Voters, if the loophole is real and unaddressed. The House, if scheduling disputes delay electoral reform.
Bottom Line: A lawmaker says the Electoral Act has a hole. If he is right, ballots without security marks can be counted. The House must examine the clause. The Senate must act before the year ends. Nigerians deserve an answer, not a scheduling argument.