As political campaigns officially begin this August, Nigerians are once again confronted with the defining question that has shaped every election since the return to democratic rule in 1999: will the votes truly count? While political parties mobilise supporters, unveil manifestos and traverse the country in search of votes, millions of Nigerians remain concerned not only about campaign promises but also about whether the electoral process will faithfully reflect the will of the people. It is against this backdrop that the role of technology in Nigeria’s elections deserves renewed examination.
When the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) introduced the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS), many Nigerians believed the country had finally found the technological antidote to electoral fraud. After decades of ballot-box snatching, multiple voting, underage voting, result manipulation and outright falsification, BVAS was presented as a game-changer capable of restoring confidence in Nigeria’s electoral process.
Indeed, technology has altered the conduct of elections in Nigeria. Yet, as recent electoral experiences have shown, technology, no matter how sophisticated, cannot by itself produce credible elections. Elections are ultimately administered by human beings, supervised by institutions, interpreted by the courts and accepted or rejected by citizens. Where integrity is absent, technology alone cannot manufacture credibility.
Nigeria’s democratic journey offers compelling evidence.
Before the advent of BVAS, elections were often characterised by widespread irregularities. Accreditation was largely manual, leaving room for impersonation, multiple voting and the inflation of voter figures. Electoral disputes frequently revolved around allegations that declared results bore little resemblance to what transpired at polling units.
The introduction of BVAS significantly reduced some of these abuses. The device verifies voters through fingerprints and facial recognition, making it considerably more difficult for individuals to vote more than once or to impersonate registered voters. This was a major step forward and deserves recognition.
However, technology solved only one aspect of a much broader problem. The 2023 general elections exposed both the strengths and limitations of Nigeria’s technological reforms. While BVAS generally improved voter accreditation, controversies surrounding the delayed and inconsistent upload of polling-unit results to the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) generated widespread public dissatisfaction. Many Nigerians had expected technology to provide real-time transparency from polling units to the national collation process. When that expectation was not fully realised, public trust suffered.
The lesson was clear: technology can strengthen elections, but it cannot substitute for institutional credibility.
Electoral malpractice in Nigeria has evolved. Where ballot stuffing becomes more difficult, politicians often shift to vote buying. Rather than manipulate ballot papers, they manipulate poverty.
Across many parts of the country, reports have emerged of voters being induced with cash, food items or other material benefits in exchange for their votes. No machine can detect what transpires between a politician and a voter in a private arrangement before either enters the polling unit.
Similarly, technology cannot prevent intimidation by armed thugs. It cannot stop political violence that discourages citizens from voting. It cannot prevent election officials from acting improperly if individuals choose to undermine the process.
The greatest weakness in Nigeria’s electoral system has never been technology. It has always been accountability.
Countries that have successfully integrated technology into elections did not rely on machines alone. Brazil, for example, has used electronic voting for many years, supported by a robust legal framework, continuous auditing and clear procedures that reinforce public confidence. India, the world’s largest democracy, deploys electronic voting machines nationwide while maintaining extensive security protocols, multi-layered oversight and active participation by political parties during the electoral process.
Even Estonia, widely regarded as a global leader in internet voting, succeeded because technological innovation was accompanied by strong cybersecurity, digital identity systems and high levels of public trust in state institutions. Technology flourishes where institutions are strong.
Nigeria cannot bypass the hard work of building credible institutions simply by acquiring more sophisticated devices. Another challenge that deserves attention is cybersecurity.
As electoral processes become increasingly digital, the risk of cyberattacks, data breaches and coordinated disinformation campaigns also increases. Around the world, elections are now vulnerable not only to physical disruption but also to digital interference. False information can spread across social media within minutes, manipulated videos can mislead voters, and organised online campaigns can inflame ethnic or religious tensions before election day.
Artificial intelligence has further complicated this reality. AI now enables the creation of convincing deepfake videos, fabricated audio recordings and manipulated images capable of deceiving millions before corrections can catch up. A falsified video purporting to show a candidate making inflammatory remarks could spread rapidly and influence public opinion before its authenticity is questioned. Yet the same technology can also become a powerful defender of democracy.
Artificial intelligence can assist electoral bodies in identifying unusual voting patterns, detecting coordinated misinformation campaigns, monitoring social media manipulation and strengthening cybersecurity around election infrastructure. Used responsibly, AI can become an ally in protecting electoral integrity rather than undermining it.
Nigeria should therefore embrace technological innovation while recognising its limits. Another issue demanding urgent attention is the prosecution of electoral offenders.
Election after election, reports of ballot snatching, violence, destruction of electoral materials and vote buying dominate public discourse. Yet very few perpetrators are successfully prosecuted. This culture of impunity emboldens offenders.
No electoral technology can compensate for the absence of consequences.
The long-standing proposal for an Electoral Offences Commission deserves renewed consideration. A properly funded and genuinely independent institution dedicated to investigating and prosecuting electoral offences would send a strong signal that violations of electoral laws carry real consequences. Without accountability, even the most advanced technology will eventually be circumvented. Public confidence also depends on consistency.
Electoral guidelines should be implemented uniformly across the federation. Procedures announced before elections should not appear to change during critical stages of the process. Predictability builds confidence; inconsistency breeds suspicion. Civic responsibility must equally not be overlooked.
Credible elections require citizens who reject vote buying, political parties that respect democratic principles, security agencies that remain neutral, electoral officials who uphold professionalism and a judiciary that resolves disputes impartially and expeditiously. Democracy is not sustained by machines; it is sustained by values.
As campaigns gather momentum across the country, political parties and their candidates must remember that elections are not won by technology but by the confidence of the electorate. Campaigns should be driven by ideas rather than insults, policies rather than propaganda, and persuasion rather than violence. Technology can protect the ballot, but only political actors can protect the integrity of the democratic process.
As Nigeria prepares for future elections, policymakers should resist the temptation to assume that procuring more technology alone will solve the country’s electoral challenges. Technology is an instrument, not a substitute for integrity.
The future of credible elections in Nigeria will depend on the convergence of innovation, independent institutions, transparent administration, effective law enforcement, political maturity and an informed electorate.
BVAS has undoubtedly moved Nigeria forward. It has reduced some longstanding electoral abuses and improved voter accreditation. But it has not eliminated electoral fraud because fraud itself has evolved beyond what machines alone can detect.
As campaigns begin this August, every political actor faces a choice. Candidates can either embrace issue-based campaigns that inspire confidence in the democratic process or resort to the old politics of misinformation, intimidation, vote buying and violence. The electorate, in turn, must insist that the quality of ideas-not the size of campaign war chests-determines electoral success.
Nigeria’s democratic future will not be secured merely by introducing newer devices. It will be secured when technology is matched by integrity, accountability and an unwavering commitment to the rule of law. Only then will elections truly reflect not the power of politicians, but the sovereign will of the Nigerian people.
•Dr. Ofoye writes from Lagos.
The post As campaigns begin in August: Can technology deliver credible elections in Nigeria? By Ejiro Ofoye appeared first on Vanguard News.