Interesting from Nigeria’s electoral umpire: “The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has taken a major step toward integrating advanced technologies into Nigeria’s electoral process with the creation of a dedicated Artificial Intelligence (AI) Division under its ICT Department. Announced on Thursday, the initiative is part of a broader reform drive aimed at modernizing election management systems and strengthening the credibility of future polls—especially the 2027 general elections.”
Good People, INEC’s problem is not lack of AI or technology. The problem in my opinion is that INEC is protected by the Constitution and the Electoral Act to remain unaccountable. Sure – what is this village guy saying about the law? Pardon me because when it comes to the nation, we can all have voices.
This has been my suggestion: we need a system, where as part of an election dispute resolution, the aggrieved candidate would sue the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) instead of the opponent, on issues of not conducting elections as written in the rule book. This would represent a significant shift from the current system, where candidates typically challenge the election results by suing the declared winner.
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 17 (June 9 – Sept 6, 2025) today for early bird discounts. Do annual for access to Blucera.com.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Register to become a better CEO or Director with Tekedia CEO & Director Program.
Yes, two people contested an election and one was declared a winner. Then, a few days later, you sue the opponent because you do not agree with the outcome. Why is that so? Why not the umpire which managed the election, and let it prove that the results are indeed valid.
Until Nigeria changes the rule book, INEC will not have any incentive to evolve. And this is not an area AI has been trained to handle! Indeed, by the time INEC has been sued and it begins to lose cases in court, invalidating the outcomes of electoral results, both the winner and loser will challenge INEC to put its house in order! Then change will happen!
My position is this: if you sue INEC and it loses, both the winner and opponent will be impacted. And that means everyone will be worried if INEC is not following the rule book. The implication is clear: even as you are projected to win, you need to be concerned if INEC is not following the rule.
Today, INEC is not a player, it is just showing “present” because it has nothing to lose. But a system where both the winner and loser are concerned that if INEC loses, everyone is affected, things will change. Think deeper into my idea: it is a mutual destiny playbook, connecting winner and loser to a shared destiny.
---
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA (June 9 – Sept 6, 2025), and join Prof Ndubuisi Ekekwe and our global faculty; click here.
The aspect of who sues who is a jurisprudence problem. What we do here is to ask the victim to provide proof that there was fraud, as against asking the umpire to provide proof that everything was done right. It is who makes positive claims that should be providing proofs, and not who makes negative claims. The same way you don’t ask a defender who claims innocence to provide proof, rather it is the prosecutor’s job to prove guilt.
INEC can talk about AI Division as it pleases, but it’s the same INEC who invested in IREV but failed to use it when it mattered most, and yet there was no consequence. The fact that the IREV was set aside should have nullified the results, but in our laws we always make provisions for vagueness, because of our criminal tendencies. We know when fraud happens but we cannot bring ourselves to admit it, because of who’s involved or what we might gain.
The politicians defecting from one party to another, do they also believe in credible elections? Because if they do, there wouldn’t be need to defect in order to save their political career. Our failures and inadequacies are always staring us in the face, but because of ineptitude and dishonesty, we keep deflecting, believing that the problem is elsewhere.