Follow Us on Google
Senior Special Assistant to the President on Media and Publicity, Temitope Ajayi has asked former Resident Electoral Commissioner of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Mike Igini, to apologise to Nigerians for an incorrect assertion on the Electoral Act 2026.
Ajayi stated this in an X post on Monday.
During an interview on ARISE News last Wednesday, Igini claimed that the Electoral Act 2026 contains a new and “dangerous” provision granting presiding officers the discretion to accept or reject ballot papers that do not bear the official mark prescribed by the electoral body.
His claim centred on Section 63 of the new Act.
Igini said the section “reintroduces” a clause allowing ballot papers without official marks to be counted if the presiding officer is “satisfied” with their origin.
He said the use of the word “satisfied” gives presiding officers excessive discretion, allowing them to accept ballot papers without official security features, adding that this could encourage politicians to print fake ballot papers for elections.
He added that the provision could not be found in the Electoral Act 2022, having been removed after years of controversy.
Other News
However, a TheCable fact check confirmed that the exact provision was carried over to the new law.
“There is no evidence that the clause was removed in 2022 or newly introduced in a later amendment,” the report stated.
In his post, Ajayi berated Igini for making “unfounded claims”.
He asked him to tender an “unvarnished public apology” and recant the “deliberate falsehood he put out”.
Ajayi said, “I find it really awkward and difficult to understand how a man who spent 10 years or so as a Resident Electoral Commissioner in INEC would join opposition elements on a campaign of calumny against the same institution he served in the past just because he is now playing a different politics.
“Even if Mr. Igini had reasons to disagree with system he once worked for, decency demands that he should exercise better judgment and discretion in the way he goes about putting his views across without delegitimising INEC and eroding public confidence in the institution as an umpire.”
