A former Resident Electoral Commissioner, REC, of the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, Mike Igini, has raised fresh concerns over what he described as three “dangerous provisions” in the 2026 Electoral Act, warning that they could undermine the credibility of future elections, including the 2027 polls.

Speaking on Arise TV’s The Morning Show on Wednesday, Igini said his concerns emerged after a detailed review of the new law, despite his earlier disengagement from electoral debates due to disappointment with developments in the system.

He noted that beyond earlier concerns about Section 60(3), he had identified additional provisions he believes pose significant risks to electoral integrity.

Igini pointed to Section 63 of the Act, alleging that it allows presiding officers to accept ballot papers that do not bear INEC’s official marks or security features, provided they are “satisfied” with their authenticity. He argued that this introduces subjective discretion that could be exploited.

According to him, the use of the word “satisfied” revives a controversial clause previously contained in the 2010 Electoral Act, which was later removed after years of criticism.

Igini warned that such discretion could enable the use of unauthorised ballot papers during elections.

The ex-REC also raised concerns about Section 138, which deals with grounds for filing election petitions. Igini said the provision suggests that actions or omissions contrary to INEC directives—but not explicitly against the Electoral Act—cannot be used as grounds to challenge election results.

He argued that this effectively shields electoral officers who fail to comply with INEC guidelines, noting that such directives are typically contained in the commission’s regulations.

Furthermore, Igini criticised Section 137, which he said removes the requirement to join electoral officers—such as presiding or returning officers—as respondents in election petitions involving allegations of misconduct.

He expressed concern that this provision could make it difficult to hold individual officials accountable for alleged irregularities during elections.

He said: “You know I said I have not been interested in so many things because I’m so disappointed, but I decided and said let me go through the Electoral Act.

“I found that whereas the last intervention we had here were discussing about Section 60, sub-section 3, where the act provided a proviso that will undermine the 2027 official elections.

“I have now found a more dangerous three provisions, and I put them out, and I think that Nigeria can read it.

“First, let’s go to Section 63. Now, Section 63, which I just discovered, they have now reintroduced something very terrible. You can see it there that ballot paper that will be used for the 2027 election that does not bear the official marks and features, and security visions of INEC should be accepted by presiding officer.

“The Presiding Officer has now been given a discretion to now accept ballot paper, not withstanding the absence of the official mark, and to count that ballot paper.

“What that means is that before this election, politicians who now have access to the security features of INEC ballot, they are going to produce their ballot papers. They are going to print their own ballot paper to be accepted. This is dangerous and they put in the Electoral Act.

“Similarly, may I show Section 138 that has been one of the rigging provisions that we have cried out to be removed. As a matter of fact, you remember that in 2019, in this current Republic under Buhari, was the only time that there was no Electoral Act passed. When we made that recommendation that this thing should be removed, this section should be removed, remember that it was rejected.

“It says that an act or omission which will be contrary to the instruction or directive of the commission, or of an officer appointed for the purpose of election, but which is not contrary to the provision of this Act shall not, of itself be a ground for questioning the election.

“May I make a few observation here. You see, when you want to deceive people, you put it in words and bring that section back again. They were just short of referring to INEC regulations and guidelines, because the instruction and directive of INEC are contained in INEC regulation and guideline.

“They are saying that a presiding officer, a coalition officer, a returning officer, they can abandon INEC directive or regulation. So they provided immunity there.

“Let’s go to the last section. It will interest Nigerians to know that section 137
now says that all those categories of individual, I think the other time, I provided you what we call a pyramid. All the categories that we have just mentioned, Presiding Officer, Returning officers. It says that where the petition, that is where anybody now to go to file a petition, complaints of the conduct of an Electoral Officer, a presiding officer, returning officer, it shall not be necessary to join such officer. That means that those who have disobeyed to follow INEC instruction and guideline, that it shall not be necessary to bring them to the court.

“You are now saying that the people who rig election, presiding officers, who actually were the maker of the document, you said, because you have joined INEC as a respondent, it shall not be necessary to bring them to the tribunal.”