Why Electronic Transmission of Election Results Is Not Enough: The Critical Need for Digitized Collation

In the evolving landscape of electoral technology, a pivotal argument has emerged from leading governance advocates: that the electronic transmission of election results, while a significant step forward, is an incomplete solution if not paired with a fully digitized collation process. This insight, prominently voiced by Ezenwa Nwagwu, Executive Director of the Peering Advocacy and Advancement Centre in Africa (PAACA), challenges policymakers and electoral management bodies to adopt a more holistic approach to technological integration in voting. This article provides a comprehensive, SEO-optimized exploration of this critical issue, breaking down the technical, procedural, and democratic implications of relying solely on result transmission without addressing the collation phase.

Introduction: The Digital Election Dilemma

The march toward digital democracy has seen electoral commissions worldwide adopt technology to enhance the speed, transparency, and perceived integrity of elections. In Nigeria, the introduction of the Results Viewing Portal (IREV) and the mandate for electronic transmission of polling unit results were hailed as landmark reforms in the Electoral Act 2022. However, experts warn that this creates a dangerous illusion of full digitization. The core of the problem lies in a fundamental disconnect: transmitting an image of a result from a polling unit is not the same as digitally processing, tabulating, and certifying that result through the entire collation chain. Without a digitized collation system, the transmission step merely shifts the potential for manipulation or error to a later, less transparent stage. This article unpacks why electoral reforms must address the entire results lifecycle, not just its initial digital handoff.

Key Points: The Core Argument Against Transmission-Only Systems

Based on expert analysis, the argument against relying solely on electronic transmission can be distilled into several critical, interconnected points.

1. The Primacy of Collation Over Transmission

The most crucial distinction is between transmission (sending data from point A to B) and collation (the legal process of gathering, verifying, summing, and declaring results from multiple sources). A system that only digitizes transmission leaves the collation at the ward, local government, state, and national levels vulnerable to manual processes. This manual collation remains a “black box,” negating the transparency gained at the polling unit level.

2. The IREV System’s Fundamental Limitation

As noted by Nwagwu, the IREV portal is designed to display results sent as images (typically photographs of Form EC8A). It does not have the inherent capability to automatically convert these image files into numerical data for real-time, automated tallying. This means the portal serves as a viewing gallery for scanned documents, not a dynamic results management system. The digitization of results is therefore incomplete.

3. The Persistent Threat of Result Manipulation

When collation is manual, the door remains open for the classic malpractices of “gaming” the system: altering figures on physical result sheets during transit or at collation centers, substituting forms, or engaging in “body language” pressure on collation officers. Electronic transmission does not immunize the process against these risks if the subsequent steps are analog and opaque.

4. The Democratic Imperative for End-to-End Transparency

True electoral transparency requires that every step a vote takes—from casting to counting to declaration—is observable and verifiable by stakeholders. A system where only the first step is digital creates a transparency gap. Voters and parties can see the initial result but cannot independently track or verify its journey through the collation maze, eroding trust in the final outcome.

Background: Nigeria’s Journey to Digital Results

To understand the current debate, one must review the recent history of electoral technology in Nigeria.

The 2022 Electoral Act and Its Innovations

The Electoral Act 2022 represented a major overhaul. Key provisions included:

• Mandatory Electronic Transmission: Section 47(2) requires polling unit results to be transmitted electronically to the designated portal (IREV) and to collation officers.
• Accreditation via Technology: Use of electronic devices for voter accreditation (though the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) was later deployed for both accreditation and result transmission).
• Early Result Upload: Results must be uploaded to IREV immediately after sorting and counting at the polling unit.

This was a clear response to the controversies of previous elections, where results were often delayed, lost, or altered during physical movement.

The IREV Portal: A Transparency Tool, Not a Collation Engine

Launched by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the IREV portal was designed as a public-facing transparency tool. Citizens, political parties, and observers could log in to view uploaded result images from polling units nationwide. While this was a massive leap from complete opacity, its technical function is passive display, not active computation. The system does not aggregate the numbers from thousands of images into a national tally; that aggregation is still a manual, human-led process.

Analysis: The Unaddressed Vulnerability in the Chain

Examining the results process reveals a critical vulnerability: the collation chain.

The Collation Chain Explained

In Nigeria’s presidential election system, results flow upwards:

1. Polling Unit: Results (Form EC8A) are counted, announced, and transmitted electronically via BVAS.
2. Ward/RA Collation: Ward Collation Officers (WCO) manually aggregate results from all polling units in the ward onto a Ward Result Sheet (Form EC8B).
3. Local Government (LGA) Collation: LGA Collation Officers (LCO) aggregate ward results onto Form EC8C.
4. State Collation: State Collation Officer (SCO) aggregates LGA results onto Form EC8D and declares the state winner.
5. National Collation: The National Collation Officer (NCO), the INEC Chairman, aggregates state results onto Form EC8E and declares the national winner.

Steps 2 through 5 remain predominantly manual. The electronic transmission from step 1 provides a reference image, but the legal, official result at each higher level is a manually compiled document. This is the Achilles’ heel.

Global Comparisons: What Full Digitization Looks Like

Some electoral systems have moved further:

• India’s EVMs with VVPAT: While not internet-based, the electronic vote is stored in the machine and a paper slip is provided for verification. The counting is electronic and centralized, with a robust, public audit trail.
• Philippines’ Automated Election System: Uses a highly automated process from voting (pre-marked ballots counted by scanners) to electronic transmission to a central consolidation and canvassing system that automatically tallies results.
• Estonia’s Internet Voting (i-Vote): Offers a fully digital end-to-end process from casting to counting, with cryptographic verification.

These examples highlight that end-to-end digitization means the collation itself is automated, not just the initial data capture and send.

The Legal and Trust Deficit

Nigeria’s current legal framework, while mandating transmission, does not mandate a digitally integrated collation system. The law still relies on physical forms (EC8B, EC8C, etc.) as the primary legal documents. This creates a dual system: a digital reference (IREV) and a legal manual process. In any dispute, courts must rely on the manually collated forms, not the transmitted images, potentially nullifying the transparency benefit of transmission if discrepancies arise. This legal-technical mismatch is a fundamental flaw.

Practical Advice: Pathways to Comprehensive Electoral Reform

Moving from critique to solution requires coordinated action from various stakeholders.

For the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC)

• Develop and Deploy a Digital Collation Platform: INEC must build or procure a secure, auditable software platform that receives the electronically transmitted polling unit results (not just images, but structured data) and automatically aggregates them up the collation chain. Each collation officer would authenticate and approve the digital aggregate, which becomes the official result.
• Amend Regulations to Mandate Digital Aggregation: Use its rule-making power to stipulate that the digital aggregate from the platform is the primary result for that level, with manual forms as a backup.
• Pilot and Stress-Test: Conduct extensive pilots of a full digitized collation system in off-cycle elections (e.g., governorship, local government) before deploying it for a general election.

For the National Assembly (Legislators)

• Amend the Electoral Act: Explicitly define and mandate a “digitally integrated results management system” that covers transmission and automated collation. Provide a clear timeline and resources for implementation.
• Fund the Technology: Allocate specific budgetary provisions for the development, procurement, and maintenance of a national collation platform, including robust cybersecurity measures and offline redundancy.
• Strengthen Offenses and Penalties: Update laws to specifically criminalize interference with or manipulation of the digital collation system, including unauthorized access and data tampering.

For Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) and the Media

• Advocate for “Full Stack” Digitization: Shift advocacy from “electronic transmission” to “end-to-end digital results management.” Frame the issue as incomplete reform.
• Monitor the Collation Process: Deploy observers not just at polling units, but crucially at ward and LGA collation centers to document manual procedures and compare them with the IREV data.
• Public Education: Educate voters on the difference between transmission and collation. A transparent final result requires transparency in every step.

For Political Parties and Candidates

• Demand Access and Audits: Insist on being provided with direct, real-time access (via secure APIs or dashboards) to the digital collation platform’s data streams, not just the IREV images.
• Deploy Parallel Tabulators: Use the publicly available transmitted data to build independent tabulation models to cross-check against INEC’s manual collation figures.
• Document All Discrepancies: Meticulously document any inconsistencies between transmitted images and collated results as evidence for election petitions.

FAQ: Addressing Common Questions

Q1: Does this mean electronic transmission was a bad idea?

A: No. Electronic transmission was a necessary and positive first step. It eliminated the worst excesses of result snatching and alteration during physical movement from polling units. The argument is that it is a necessary but insufficient step. It must be followed by digitizing the next vulnerable phase: collation.

Q2: Is a fully digitized collation system prone to hacking?

A: Any digital system has cybersecurity risks. However, a well-designed system employs multiple layers: encryption, multi-factor authentication for collation officers, immutable audit logs, and secure, air-gapped backup servers. The risk of a coordinated, undetected hack on a properly secured national system is arguably lower than the historical, proven risk of manual result manipulation by insiders at collation centers, which has no digital footprint.

Q3: What about the cost? Can Nigeria afford this?

A: The cost of developing and deploying a secure national collation platform is a one-time, capital investment. It must be weighed against the immense and recurring costs of post-election litigation, political instability, reputational damage, and the human cost of disputed elections. The long-term savings in national cohesion and governance legitimacy are immeasurable. Furthermore, the technology can be procured through transparent, competitive bidding and maintained at a fraction of the cost of repeated election disputes.

Q4: Does this apply only to presidential elections?

A: The principle applies universally. The collation process exists for governorship, National Assembly, and state assembly elections, albeit with different administrative layers. A comprehensive digitized results management system should be scalable to cover all elections conducted by INEC, ensuring uniformity and integrity across the board.

Q5: What is the legal implication of not digitizing collation?

A: The primary legal implication is the perpetuation of a legally ambiguous dual system. Courts, when adjudicating election petitions, are bound to consider the “non-compliance” with the Electoral Act. If the Act mandates electronic transmission but the subsequent, legally decisive collation is manual and non-transparent, it creates a gap that can be exploited and argued as substantial non-compliance that may have affected the election outcome. It weakens the legal robustness of the entire results declaration process.

Conclusion: The Imperative for Holistic Digital Transformation

The discourse ignited by Ezenwa Nwagwu cuts to the heart of modern electoral integrity. Electronic transmission of results is a vital tool, but it is not a panacea. Its value is entirely contingent on what happens next. If the collation process—the very mechanism that consolidates the will of the people—remains analog, opaque, and susceptible to manipulation, then the digital transmission merely provides a glossy, high-tech veneer over a fundamentally vulnerable process.

True electoral reform demands an end-to-end digital system. This means a seamlessly integrated platform where a result, once digitally captured and transmitted from a polling unit, flows through an automated, auditable, and publicly verifiable aggregation process up to the final declaration. Anything less is an incomplete revolution that leaves the door ajar for the very malpractices technology was meant to banish.

For Nigeria, and for any democracy embracing technology, the path forward is clear: policymakers must move beyond the symbolism of transmission and legislate, fund, and implement the full digitization of the collation chain. The credibility of elections, and by extension,