As Nigeria once again revisits the mechanics of electoral reform, a fresh intervention has entered the debate, not from a politician or election administrator, but from a medical professional.
Dr. Raji Bello, a Consultant Anaesthetist at the University of Maiduguri, has argued that the country’s preoccupation with electronic voting and electronic transmission of results risks mistaking technology for integrity.
His comments come against the backdrop of sustained public agitation for electoral reform, particularly around the electronic transmission of results from polling units to central collation systems. Since the controversies surrounding the 2019 and 2023 general elections, electronic transmission has become a rallying point for reform advocates who see it as a safeguard against manipulation during collation.
Civil society groups, opposition parties, and many urban voters have framed electronic transmission as the most important structural reform needed to secure credible elections. The National Assembly has debated amendments to the electoral law. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has expanded its use of digital tools, including result-upload portals. Yet trust deficits persist.
Dr. Raji Bello’s Cautionary note
In a widely circulated statement, he clarified that earlier playful posts he had made were not dismissive of election integrity. “My appreciation for it is high,” he wrote, explaining that his intention had been to mock what he described as Nigeria’s “national addiction to easy solutions.”
According to him, countries that have achieved credible elections did so not primarily through technology, but through enforcement.
“Every country in the world that has achieved credible elections has done so not through technology but by consistently holding all violators of election integrity to account,” he stated. “A new technology without accountability would only establish a new frontier for election fraud.”
Dr. Bello argued that while technology can improve efficiency and security, it cannot substitute for consequences. In his formulation, digital tools may streamline processes, but they cannot deter actors who operate in an environment where prosecution is rare and penalties uncertain.
“What countries have done,” he said, “is to rely on technology to improve the efficiency and security of elections while relying on accountability to sustain their integrity.”
The debate over electronic transmission in Nigeria has often centred on whether digital uploads from polling units would eliminate manipulation at collation centres. Supporters argue that real-time uploads reduce human interference and increase transparency. Critics warn about infrastructure gaps, cybersecurity risks, and overreliance on systems that can still be compromised.
Dr. Bello’s intervention shifts the focus from infrastructure to incentives
On the electoral scene, he argued, Nigerians struggle to hold lawbreakers accountable because doing so is politically difficult. “Almost all the violators of the integrity of our previous elections have been roaming free,” he observed, warning that concentrating on a “single item of technology as a magical solution” could prove illusory.
He suggested that if electronic transmission were introduced without systemic enforcement, efforts to manipulate results would simply migrate to new pressure points. “As soon as a way is found to violate the integrity of the all-important electronic transmission, it would be put to use. And we would go back to square one.”
His comments reflect a broader anxiety within governance circles: that structural reform in Nigeria often prioritises procedural redesign over institutional discipline. Electoral offences remain under-prosecuted. Proposals for a dedicated Electoral Offences Commission have lingered for years without full operationalisation. Meanwhile, each election cycle renews arguments about process rather than penalties.
The national conversation, therefore, is not simply about whether electronic transmission works. It is about whether enforcement works.
In a political climate where technology is increasingly seen as a neutral arbiter, Dr. Bello’s position is a reminder that systems reflect the incentives of those who operate them. Electronic voting may change how votes are counted. Whether it changes behaviour depends on whether electoral crime carries real consequences.
As Nigeria prepares for future electoral cycles, the tension between technological reform and institutional accountability is likely to intensify. For Dr. Bello, however, the hierarchy is clear: credibility flows from punishment, not from pixels.