Former Senate President and National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Senator David Mark, has pushed back strongly against comments by Senate President Godswill Akpabio on the ongoing amendment of the Electoral Act, insisting that the ADC’s position is clear and non-negotiable.
The exchange occurred on Saturday at the public presentation of “The Burden of Legislators in Nigeria,” a book by former Senator Effiong Bob, held at the NAF Conference Centre, Abuja, where Mark chaired the occasion.
During his address, Akpabio had urged the ADC and other critics of the amendment process not to be in a hurry, stressing that the Senate was yet to conclude work on the Electoral Act amendment. He argued that calls for real-time electronic transmission of election results failed to take into account Nigeria’s infrastructural challenges, citing lack of electricity and internet access in many rural communities.
However, responding pointedly, Mark said the Senate President could not speak on behalf of the ADC, adding that the party’s demand — and that of many Nigerians — was straightforward.
Mark said there was no need for lengthy explanations or justifications, stressing that all the ADC was asking for was for the National Assembly to pass the amendment with provisions for real-time transmission of results, and allow the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to determine its feasibility.
“What the ADC is saying is, pass the law, and there should be electronic transmission. Let INEC decide whether they can do it (real-time electronic transmission) or not. Don’t speak for INEC,” Mark stated.
“The National Assembly should pass the law and let INEC complain if there is a problem,” Mark said, noting that neither INEC nor Nigerians are currently complaining about real-time transmission, but rather demanding greater transparency and credibility in elections.
He argued that raising infrastructural excuses at the lawmaking stage only weakens public confidence in the reform process, insisting that electoral laws should be designed to protect the integrity of the vote, not to pre-emptively limit it.
Mark’s intervention drew attention to the widening gap between public expectations and legislative caution on electoral reforms, reinforcing ADC’s stance that Nigeria’s democracy can only be strengthened through transparent, technology-driven elections.
Speaking at the same event, Akpabio fired back at critics of the ongoing Electoral Act amendment, accusing some civil society organisations (CSOs) and commentators of abusing the National Assembly without understanding the lawmaking process.
“There is a man who heads one NGO or a CSO. He was on television the other day abusing the Senate, the Senate that he makes money from. He said this Senate is the worst since the world was founded,” Akpabio said.
“The Electoral Act amendment is incomplete, yet they are already on television. They don’t understand lawmaking.”
Akpabio explained that legislative work involves multiple stages, including motions, readings, public hearings, and approval of votes and proceedings. Until these steps are completed, he said, it is premature for anyone to claim the Senate has failed.
“When we bring out the votes and proceedings, any senator has a right to rise up and say, ‘On clause three, this was what we agreed upon.’ Only then can you talk about what the Senate has done or not done,” he said.
He described some critics as “mouth legislators,” urging them to contest elections if they wish to engage in lawmaking rather than merely criticize from television studios.
He also dismissed the notion that agreements reached during legislative retreats automatically bind the Senate, calling retreats “part of consultations, not lawmaking.”
Akpabio added that attempts by some NGOs to influence senators with externally funded papers were not legitimate lawmaking.
“We will not be intimidated. Our lawmaking will reflect the feelings of the generality of Nigerians, not that of one NGO or somebody getting money from the European Union,” he said.
The Senate President also challenged politicians who publicly oppose godfatherism but practice it in private, saying credibility in the fight against the phenomenon must be backed by personal example.
Reacting to discussions on godfatherism during the event, Akpabio pointed to what he described as contradictions in the stance of some political actors.
“And then, of course, members of the House of Assembly also include the son of a distinguished senator. So when I heard that he was against godfatherism, I said, okay,” Akpabio said.
He added, “Since you’re against godfatherism, maybe you’ll withdraw your son from the House of Assembly as a starting point of showing that you’re against godfatherism.”
The Senate President argued that it is inconsistent to condemn godfatherism while allegedly benefiting from it.
“You cannot be saying something on the left-hand side and practising it on the right. Otherwise, that will amount to approbating and reprobating,” he stated.
Akpabio, however, acknowledged that the lawmaker in question was performing well in the legislature.