2027 ELECTIONS: ADC DEFIES INEC WARNING, VOWS TO PUBLISH POLLING-UNIT RESULTS

The African Democratic Congress (ADC) has vowed to collect, verify and publish polling-unit results during the 2027 general elections despite a warning from the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) against privately collated election results.

The party’s position has reopened a sensitive debate about the boundaries of electoral law, the dangers of misinformation and the erosion of public confidence in Nigeria’s election management system.

ADC National Publicity Secretary Bolaji Abdullahi said the party would respect INEC’s exclusive authority to declare official election results and winners but maintained that political parties and citizens could independently collect, verify and share polling-unit information.

The dispute comes as political actors prepare for the 2027 elections and continue to debate the transparency of the electoral process, ValidViewNetwork reports.

WHY INEC HAS A LEGITIMATE CONCERN

INEC’s warning cannot simply be dismissed as an attempt to suppress transparency.

Nigeria has experienced situations in which unofficial election figures circulate before collation is complete. Some figures may be incomplete, while others may be fabricated or deliberately manipulated to create a misleading impression of who won.

A political party could publish results from selected polling units while omitting others. An individual could alter a genuine result sheet and circulate the altered version.

Social media can spread such material rapidly before election officials or independent observers establish the facts.

In a politically tense environment, misleading claims about results can undermine public confidence and potentially trigger unrest.

The law therefore has a legitimate role in determining how election results are collected, collated, announced and challenged.

However, the existence of those risks does not automatically mean that every independent effort to document or publish polling-unit information should be prohibited.

The important distinction is between publishing verifiable information and presenting unverified figures as the official outcome of an election.

WHAT THE ADC IS ARGUING

The ADC maintains that political parties have a legitimate interest in documenting the results recorded at polling units and making those figures available to the public.

That position reflects an important democratic principle: transparency improves when citizens and political parties can compare independently collected records with the figures announced through official channels.

Party agents observe voting and counting at polling units. Where they are legally entitled to obtain result sheets, those records can provide an independent basis for checking the accuracy of subsequent collation.

But the ADC must also explain how it will protect the integrity of its proposed system. Will it publish photographs or copies of the original result sheets? How will it authenticate documents? What will it do when figures from different sources conflict? How will it prevent fabricated or altered documents from entering its database?

These questions matter because the party cannot credibly demand transparency from INEC while treating its own figures as automatically reliable. The same standard of verification should apply to everyone.

THE 2023 ELECTIONS AND THE PROMISE OF TECHNOLOGY

The controversy is inseparable from the experience of the 2023 general elections.

Before those elections, INEC promoted the use of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System and the electronic transmission and public viewing of polling-unit result sheets through its Result Viewing Portal, known as IReV.

The technology was expected to strengthen confidence by allowing Nigerians to examine polling-unit results rather than depend entirely on verbal announcements and subsequent summaries.

However, delays and technical problems affecting the uploading of presidential election result sheets to IReV generated widespread criticism.

INEC attributed the problems to technical difficulties, including glitches affecting the process. The commission’s explanations did not satisfy all political actors and voters who had expected the electronic system to operate more smoothly.

It is important to distinguish the electronic publication of polling-unit result sheets from the formal collation and legal declaration of election results. They are related processes, but they are not identical.

Nevertheless, the problems surrounding IReV became a major issue in the public debate about the credibility of the 2023 presidential election.

ADVERTISEMENT

For critics, the experience demonstrated that technological promises must be supported by reliable implementation.

TRUST IS NOT RESTORED BY ASSURANCE ALONE

INEC has a statutory responsibility to administer elections and declare results in accordance with the law. But institutional authority does not eliminate the need for public accountability.

An electoral commission must demonstrate that its procedures work, explain technical failures clearly and make the relevant records accessible in accordance with the law.

When assurances are not matched by performance, public confidence suffers.

The commission should therefore approach the ADC dispute as an opportunity to clarify the legal position and demonstrate how the 2027 process will improve on previous shortcomings.

It should explain precisely what conduct it considers unlawful, which legal provisions support its position and how political parties can publish verified information without usurping INEC’s authority.

THE LAW MUST BE RESPECTED, BUT SO MUST TRANSPARENCY

Election laws exist for good reasons. They establish procedures, allocate responsibilities and provide mechanisms for resolving disputes.

Political parties cannot simply disregard those rules because they distrust the commission.

Equally, electoral law should not be interpreted or enforced in a way that unnecessarily obstructs legitimate scrutiny.

The ADC must distinguish its proposed publication of independently verified polling-unit figures from the official declaration of winners.

INEC must distinguish unlawful declarations or fabricated results from the lawful collection and dissemination of authentic polling-unit information.

The government and the commission should also ensure that disputes about the interpretation of electoral rules are addressed through clear legal processes rather than political confrontation.

WHAT MUST CHANGE BEFORE 2027?

The commission should improve the reliability of its technology, establish transparent procedures for handling technical failures and provide clear guidance on the publication of polling-unit information.

Political parties should train their agents to document results accurately and preserve the original records. Independent observers and journalists should have access to reliable information that allows them to compare claims and identify discrepancies.

Above all, the process should enable Nigerians to understand how the final outcome was reached.

ValidViewNetwork reports that the ADC’s decision to publish polling-unit results has exposed a difficult balance between the enforcement of electoral law and the need to restore confidence in INEC. The lesson is that credible elections require both lawful procedures and transparent implementation.

INEC must demonstrate that its systems work, while political parties must ensure that the information they publish is authentic and verifiable. Neither official authority nor opposition suspicion should replace evidence.