Much ado about transmitting results via the BVAS

There have been hues and cries almost everywhere concerning the credibility of the entire electoral processes. The BVAS is at the centre of all the complaints and controversies. Many believe that any result from any poll that is not transmitted via the BVAS is either fake or fraudulent. Is this really true?

The Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Election’s 2022 issued by INEC and pursuant to the enabling powers vested on it by the Electoral Act, 2022 is our guide here. Many voters including some of the political parties are of the view (erroneously, I think) that the failure of polling officers to transmit poll results electronically through the BVAS materially dents the credibility of the results declared by INEC and therefore, such declared results are fraudulent. Is this what the INEC Regulations says? Is transmission of election results a sine qua non to the validity of the results of the polls declared? Is INEC under compulsion to rely on results transmitted electronically?

Clause 48(a) of the INEC Regulations provides that “An election result shall only be collated if the Collation Officer ascertains that the number of accredited voters agrees with the number recorded in the BVAS and votes scored by political parties on the result sheet is correct and agrees with the result electronically transmitted or transferred directly from the Polling Unit as prescribed in these Regulations and Guidelines.” Clause 48(C) of the same Regulations provides that “If no result has been directly transmitted electronically for a polling unit or any level of collation, the provision of Clause 93 of these Regulations shall be applied”. Simply, what this means is that the INEC Regulations and Guidelines recognize situations where the BVAS would not be used or unable to transmit or transfer any result of any polling unit or at any level of the collation process. With the use of the word “Shall” used in Clause 48(c) above, INEC is under compulsion to resort to alternative manual means of transmitting poll results, if electronic transmission is either not available or feasible.

Clauses 92 and 93 of the INEC Regulations may help explain better. Clause 92 provides that “At every level of collation, where the INEC copy of collated results from the immediate level of collation exists, it shall be adopted for collation.” Clause 93 of the Regulations further emphasizes the use of hardcopies as a primary source by providing that “Where the INEC hard copy of collated results from the immediate lower level of collation does not exist, the Collation Officer SHALL use the electronically transmitted results or results from the IReV portal to continue collation. Where none of these exist, the Collation Officer SHALL ask for duplicate hardcopies issued by the Commission to the following bodies in the order below: (1) The Nigerian Police Force (2) Agents of political parties.

 Clause 93 of the INEC Regulation seems clear and visibly too, that the hardcopies of poll results are the primary source for collation, not the electronic transmitted results. Electronically transmitted results would only be helpful for the purpose of identifying fraud in the process of collation by comparing the electronic version of the result and the hardcopies from the polling units. It ends there. However, INEC does not have any justification for its failure to transmit the results through the BIVAS. We can do better than this.

Going forward, more work has to be done on the Electoral Act, 2022 to make it difficult for human interventions to frustrate the good intentions of the Act, which is to create an enabling environment for the conduct of elections that will be generally accepted as credible, fair and transparent. Real time electronic transmission of results should be included and made mandatory in the Electoral Act and consequences stated for non compliance.