INEC risks prosecution for failing to publish voters’ register online – Yiaga Africa

Yiaga Africa is accusing INEC of failing to make the national voters’ register available online for public scrutiny. Samson Itodo, the organisation’s executive director, said Section 19 of the Electoral Act 2022 uses mandatory wording. In his view, INEC had no discretion to omit online publication.

The register lets voters check whether their details are correctly recorded. A voter could report an incorrect gender entry, while relatives could alert INEC that a deceased person remained listed. This process supports corrections before voting begins.

The concern arose less than three weeks before the Anambra governorship election. INEC said it had displayed copies at polling units, but Itodo stressed that this did not replace online publication. He urged INEC to explain the omission and warned that the alleged breach could lead to criminal proceedings or court action.

A national voters’ register is the official record of registered voters used in an election. It allows people and election stakeholders to check who is listed and whether the recorded information is accurate. The article presents access to this register as important for public scrutiny and confidence in elections.

The article gives specific examples rather than a complete list of fields. It says a voter might find that their gender was recorded incorrectly. Relatives might also report that a deceased person still appears on the register. These examples show why inspection matters before election day.

INEC is responsible for making the register available under the law. The article says voters can inspect their details and report errors for correction. It does not provide a full inventory of the register’s data fields, so details beyond those examples are not specified in the report.

The article refers to a legal requirement that the preliminary voters’ register be made available online 90 days before the 2027 general election. That deadline gives voters time to inspect their details, report mistakes, and seek corrections. It also gives the public a chance to scrutinise the electoral roll before voting.

The timing described for Anambra was much tighter. The register was reportedly still missing from INEC’s website less than three weeks before the governorship election. INEC said copies had already been displayed at polling units, but Yiaga Africa said that physical display did not satisfy the separate online requirement.

The article therefore presents a serious timing and compliance concern. It also notes that INEC had published the register online during the previous electoral cycle under former chairman Mahmood Yakubu. It says stakeholders could seek court action to compel compliance if the omission continues.

Section 19 provides possible penalties for INEC officials who fail to display the voters’ register as required by law. According to Samson Itodo, an official or staff member convicted of that failure could receive a fine of N100,000, a six-month prison sentence, or both. The consequence is therefore potentially criminal, not merely administrative.

The penalty concerns failure to display the register in the manner prescribed by law. The article distinguishes this duty from publishing the register online and from giving copies to political parties. It also says the register must be displayed so voters can inspect their details and raise objections or corrections.

The article says prosecution would ordinarily fall to the state. However, interested stakeholders could approach the courts to compel INEC to comply. Itodo urged the commission to explain its silence, warning that failing to do so could weaken public confidence in the electoral process.

INEC is the central actor responsible for making the voters’ register available. The article says Section 19 requires the commission to publish it online for public scrutiny and display copies as prescribed. INEC also has a separate obligation to provide copies to political parties before an election.

Voters and their relatives help test the register’s accuracy. A voter can report an incorrect detail, such as gender. Relatives can notify INEC that a deceased person remains listed. The article implies that INEC handles the resulting corrections, although it does not describe a separate correction authority.

Enforcement involves more than INEC. Itodo said prosecution would ordinarily fall to the state, while interested stakeholders could approach the courts to compel compliance. The article also says INEC officials may face penalties if convicted of failing to display the register as required.

Publishing the register online makes it accessible to Nigerians through INEC’s website. Displaying copies at polling units provides a physical inspection point for registered voters. Yiaga Africa says these duties are separate, so completing one does not remove the obligation to complete the other.

The purpose of display is to let voters inspect their entries and submit claims or objections. A voter might seek correction of a wrongly recorded gender. Relatives might report a deceased person still on the list. Political parties receive copies for a different purpose, traditionally 30 days before an election.

INEC said it had displayed copies at polling units, but the online register was absent. Itodo argued that this still left the commission non-compliant with the online requirement. The distinction matters because public access, local checking, and party access serve related but different parts of electoral scrutiny.

Allowing voters to inspect the register creates a public check on the electoral roll. People can confirm that their own information is recorded correctly and identify entries that may need attention. Yiaga Africa describes the register as a foundation of the electoral process, so its accuracy affects confidence in elections.

The article gives two clear examples. A voter whose gender is wrong can request a correction. Relatives can tell the commission that a deceased person remains on the register. These claims and objections give INEC information to review the list before voting takes place.

Public inspection also makes the process more transparent. If the register is accessible, voters and stakeholders can see whether INEC is meeting its legal duties. Itodo warned that failure to publish the register, combined with official silence, could undermine confidence. Making corrections visible and timely can help address that concern.