Osun Poll: CSOs Spot Fresh Manipulation In INEC System
...demand end to secret backend validation, electronic EC8A
Fresh concerns have emerged over the credibility of Nigeria’s electoral process as 14 Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) and the Nigerian Civil Society Situation Room have warned that new result-management procedures introduced by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) could create fresh avenues for manipulation of election results.
The CSOs, in a joint position on electronic transmission and collation of election results, specifically faulted INEC’s introduction of an electronic EC8A on the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and a new backend validation process for election results before publication on the Commission’s Results Viewing Portal (IReV).
The position was endorsed by The Kukah Centre, Yiaga Africa, The Nigerian Civil Society Situation Room, Accountability Lab Nigeria, Centre for Media and Society, Centre for Journalism, Innovation and Development, Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre, Dataphyte, ElectHer, International Press Centre, Inclusive Friends Association, Nigerian Women Trust Fund, TAF Africa and TAP Initiative.
According to them, the backend validation is not visible to the public, polling agents, or election observers, while INEC has yet to explain exactly what is being validated, who is responsible for the process, or how long it should take.
They warned that the unexplained period between the transmission of results and their eventual publication on IReV could create uncertainty and undermine public confidence in the electoral process.
The civil society organisations said the development was particularly troubling because the previous INEC administration had jettisoned the backend validation process over its potential for misuse and manipulation of election results.
They also questioned the purpose of the electronic EC8A introduced under INEC’s 2026 Regulations and Guidelines for the Conduct of Elections, noting that the regulations do not clearly state where results entered into the electronic form are transmitted or what purpose they serve.
The groups argued that this was problematic because the 2026 Electoral Act provides for the transmission of results to IReV.
They further warned that the new arrangement could lead to the existence of four versions of the same polling-unit result: the physical EC8A, the scanned result uploaded to IReV, the copy retained on the BVAS and the electronically transmitted e-EC8A.
According to them, the multiplicity of result versions could create confusion, particularly where discrepancies occur, and there is no clear mechanism for determining which version takes precedence.
More disturbing, the organisations warned that the electronic collation layer could provide advance information about electoral outcomes which compromised officials could exploit to influence the electoral process.
They therefore called on INEC to immediately abolish the backend validation of transmitted results before publication on IReV or, at the minimum, subject the process to public and independent scrutiny.
They also demanded that the electoral commission issue a comprehensive results-transmission protocol explaining the entire results-management process from polling-unit transmission to publication, while providing for an independent assessment of the upgraded BVAS and IReV systems.
The groups equally urged INEC to remove the electronic EC8A from the results-management process, citing its potential for misuse and its capacity to generate intelligence that could facilitate further manipulation of elections.
They said the forthcoming Osun election would provide a major test of INEC’s new results-management architecture, urging the Commission to implement the recommendations as evidence of its commitment to transparency, accountability and electoral integrity.
