Follow Us on Google
•Stakeholders express outrage, want electoral body to punish perpetrators
By Omoniyi Salaudeen
Nigeria is approaching 2027 at a dangerous crossroads. The threats ahead are not merely political; they are deeply technical and legal. At the centre of this storm is the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), tasked with organising a massive national exercise while fighting a war on two fronts: protecting its data from hackers and defending its timetable from court orders.
This leaves Nigerian democracy at a critical tipping point. The credibility of the 2027 polls will likely be decided long before election day, not at polling units, but in server rooms and courtrooms. Any misstep from the commission now will do more than delay the timeline. It will break the fragile trust holding the entire democratic process together. INEC cannot afford to slip, because public trust has no spare tyre.
Yet the road ahead looks uneven because two critical pillars are under pressure at the same time. One carries INEC’s data — the voter register, Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), and INEC Election Result Viewing Portal (IReV). The other carries INEC’s calendar — primaries, candidate lists, election dates. When both pillars crack together, the journey becomes dangerous for voters, candidates, and democracy itself.
Two potholes, one road
Allegations of a data hack and INEC’s timetable problems are not separate potholes. They feed each other. Even mere suspicion is enough to make parties question every figure INEC releases. For opposition figures and civil society groups tracking the road to 2027, an insider breach is almost as concerning as an external hack.
Dr Idayat Hassan, Director of the Centre for Democracy and Development, CDD, put it bluntly: “When INEC’s own database leaks through insider credentials, it is no longer a technical error. It is a governance failure. Voters will ask: if Emeka Ike’s data is public today, whose data is next tomorrow?”
Yiaga Africa’s Programme Manager, Cynthia Mbamalu, echoed the fear: “The 2023 election was lost in the court of public perception before it was lost at the tribunal. If INEC cannot secure voter data now, the IReV portal will face even deeper suspicion in 2027. Trust is built before election day, not after.”
Critics argue the incident highlights vulnerabilities in INEC’s administrative and operational safeguards. That raises the stakes for how the commission tightens its data security protocols and credential management ahead of upcoming off-cycle gubernatorial elections in Ekiti and Osun, and the next general cycle.
Legal Minefields
Beyond the data lane, INEC’s timetable is also under siege. Courts are now deciding party primaries, delegate lists, and even who attends NEC meetings. Almost all major parties now have two NECs, two chairmen, two candidate lists, all backed by court orders. The PDP is not only battling factional NEC meetings in Abuja but also presidential primaries. The Wike-led PDP faction nominated Sandy Onor as its presidential candidate, while the Saminu Turaki faction declared Goodluck Jonathan the candidate in absentia at their convention. In the ADC, Atiku Abubakar won the primaries conducted by the David Mark faction, but the group led by Dumebi Kachikwu nominated Kachikwu instead. One faction of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), elected Adewole Adebayo as candidate, while the Gabam faction produced Akeem Atanda through a parallel congress.
The Labour Party still has two chairmen claiming legitimacy. The New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) is struggling to expand beyond Kano. For the opposition, a clean timetable and clean data are survival tools. Without them, they fragment further.
Court orders on the timetable also become weapons inside opposition parties. One faction conducts a primary and gets INEC monitoring. The other runs to court, gets an order stopping INEC from recognising it, then conducts a parallel primary. By the time INEC is free to act, the party has two candidates for one ticket. Voters in 2023 saw this in Zamfara APC. It ended in post-election litigation and voter apathy.
So an uneven road means different things to different drivers. The APC can possibly navigate it with state power and federal access. Opposition parties easily crash into every pothole because they have no cushion.
If INEC cannot convincingly rebut data hack allegations, voters will not trust BVAS or IReV in 2027. If INEC cannot implement a binding timetable, candidates will not trust the nomination process. When both trust deficits exist at the same time, losers will head to court before collation even begins. That puts the electoral commission in a dilemma.
More troubling is a subsisting court order freezing parts of the election timetable. A Federal High Court in Abuja recently issued a landmark judgment nullifying key portions of INEC’s schedule for 2027. The court ruled that INEC overstepped its legal boundaries by shortening statutory timelines set by the National Assembly. The suit, filed by political parties including the SDP, challenged INEC’s authority to independently shorten deadlines.
Chief Chekwas Okorie, speaking with Sunday Sun on the subsisting court order on INEC’s timetable, argued: “Part of INEC’s trust deficit stems from its election guidelines. A court of competent jurisdiction has ruled that they are contrary to the Electoral Act and the Constitution of Nigeria. Many party members, especially aspirants who feel short-changed, are now moving to other parties to seek nomination. INEC is in a difficult situation. If it denies those parties the right to submit candidates, it will be courting trouble.
“Surprisingly, INEC has gone to the Court of Appeal to challenge the matter. What will INEC lose by obeying the judgment of the court? What will it gain by prolonging the matter in court and heightening tension in the polity?
“Parties are now relying on the new judgment to readjust their programmes, including admitting fresh candidates who are moving away from parties where they have been short-changed.
“The whole confusion in the polity lies with INEC. INEC should simply obey the judgment of the trial court which ruled that its timetable does not conform with the electoral provisions and the Constitution of Nigeria.”
Constitutional lawyer and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Mr Mike Ozekhome, warned that the judgment exposes deeper risks: “INEC cannot legislate by timetable. Once the commission begins to truncate timelines, it invites litigation. And litigation in Nigeria is a tool for political warfare.”
Public Scepticism
The data leakage controversy erupted after a media aide to the FCT Minister published the private Continuous Voter Registration details of Nollywood actor Emeka Ike on X. The leaked information included his profile photo, Voter Identification Number, and registration centre. The incident sparked heavy criticism over data protection within the electoral body. Political figures like former Vice President Atiku Abubakar demanded explanations on how internal records ended up in the public domain.
In a statement issued on Tuesday by his media aide Phrank Shaibu, Atiku said: “INEC’s statement has moved this issue beyond conjecture. The Commission confirmed that voter information was accessed through credentials assigned to personnel participating in the on-going CVR exercise and that such information was released without authority. What Nigerians want to know is simple: how did information in a restricted database find its way into the hands of political actors?”
“The fact that there was no external hack does not diminish the gravity. If anything, it raises more troubling questions about internal controls and the possibility of political interference,” he added.
Civil society groups have been louder. The Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, said: “INEC must treat this as a data protection breach under the Nigeria Data Protection Act 2023, not just an internal memo. Nigerians deserve to know who accessed what, when, and why. Anything less is complicity.”
Party stakeholders have also raised the alarm. Okorie noted that the leakage had heightened tension in the polity. He said: “This is a matter of very serious concern to every well-meaning Nigerian. Even before this matter came to public knowledge, INEC had been in the eye of the storm over a trust deficit. While the new INEC leadership is still battling to reassure Nigerians of its preparedness to deliver a credible election in 2027, this leakage has shown that its technology is not safe.
“Yet INEC has not issued any convincing statement on the leakage. The fact that it came from an aide to the Minister of the FCT further defies logic. This is a minister who is a leader of the opposition party, boasting that he will ensure the return of the President, an APC candidate. His personal aide has now proved that the backend of INEC’s database is not reliable. It can be easily accessed.
“This is a situation that may make or mar not just the coming election, but even the unity of Nigeria as a country. Everything points to the fact that we may not have a rancour-free election in 2027. The President should step in. I am scared to the bone marrow that we are approaching an election under these circumstances. I do not have confidence that this INEC leadership is well attuned to giving Nigerians a reliable, free and fair election. The signs are very ominous.”
Rights activist Ankio Briggs re-echoed the concern: “The truth of the matter is that Nigeria is in a big mess when it comes to democratic norms. The breach of INEC’s database is a serious criminal offence.
“Today, El-Rufai is being prosecuted for allegedly tapping the telephone line of the National Security Adviser. The leakage of INEC data is as criminal as that.
“If INEC cannot protect a private citizen’s voting information, then the integrity of the electoral process can easily be compromised. I do not think INEC can guarantee a free and fair election under these conditions.
“INEC must assure Nigerians that our private information is safe. If it cannot do so, then it cannot guarantee the credibility of the 2027 election.
“The result that will come out of this already compromised system cannot be said to be free and fair. It erodes the confidence of the electorate.”
However, INEC said preliminary findings show no external breach of the CVR database, no hacking incident, and no unauthorised access to its ICT infrastructure from outside. The commission disclosed this in a statement by National Commissioner Mohammed Kudu Haruna, amid allegations circulating online.
According to INEC, the information was accessed through valid user credentials assigned to personnel in the on-going voter registration exercise, but was released without authorisation. The commission assured Nigerians that the broader database housing over 90 million registered voters remains secure and intact.
Even at that, the leakage has cast a shadow of doubt on the integrity of the process. More concerning is the possibility of internal sabotage. Stakeholders are worried because institutional trust is fragile. When people lose faith in the referee, the entire game is thrown into jeopardy. Technical explanations or PR statements are not enough to dispel public scepticism. When voters can no longer trust the neutrality of the umpire, the process collapses. What follows is chaos, not an election.
From technical glitch to national security
If data security fails in a system as sensitive as elections, suspicion of an inside job becomes the most logical and damaging conclusion. In cybersecurity, the strongest firewalls mean nothing if someone on the inside hands over the keys.
Prof Sam Egwu, political scientist at Bingham University, framed the stakes: “Elections in Nigeria are won and lost on perception. If citizens believe INEC is compromised from within, turnout will drop and post-election violence will rise. A leaked database is not just an IT problem. It is a threat to national cohesion.”
If INEC only fixes the technical glitch without exposing the human actors, it signals that complicity carries no consequences. To serve as a deterrent, prosecution of internal saboteurs must be transparent, swift, and severe under the Electoral Act.
The scar tissue from 2023 is still raw. The failure of real-time result transmission via IReV — blamed then on technical glitches — bruised public confidence. When a similar breach happens again, the public does not see a new mishap. They see a pattern.
APC National Publicity Secretary, Felix Morka, while defending INEC, also admitted the perception problem: “The commission has explained that there was no external hack. But explanations do not win trust. Only actions do. INEC must discipline any staff found culpable and publish the report. Nigerians are watching.”
When major figures like Atiku Abubakar question the process before voting begins, it creates a volatile environment. It primes the electorate to reject any outcome that does not favour them. That is where the risk of civil unrest begins.
Security is not just about code and servers. It is about perception. If INEC wants to save 2027 from a crisis of legitimacy, it cannot treat a database leak as an IT problem. It must treat it as a national security breach, expose the bad actors, and prove to Nigerians that the umpire cannot be bought or broken from within. Until that happens, Nigeria will keep driving toward 2027 on rims, loud, shaky, and one pothole away from a crash.
