By Abdul-Ganiyy Akanbi

A civil society organisation, CSO, the Independent Hajj Reporters, IHR, said it has uncovered alleged passport substitution in some states after the reopening of the portal for upload of pilgrims’ data in the ongoing registration process for the 2026 Hajj.

Although the organisation withheld the identities of the affected states, it disclosed that available information indicated some officials of State Muslim Pilgrims’ Welfare Boards, SMPWBs are allegedly collecting fresh international passports from intending pilgrims and charging amounts higher than the initial Hajj fare earlier announced by the National Hajj Commission of Nigeria, NAHCON.

In a statement issued by the national coordinator of IHR, Ibrahim Muhammad, “the passports are reportedly being substituted with those already in the custody of the boards to enable data upload before the deadline.”

“If confirmed, the alleged practice suggests an attempt to replace pilgrims who had already completed their payments with new entrants willing to pay higher sums, particularly in states that have already exhausted their allocated Hajj slots,” he stated.

The IHR, therefore, called on NAHCON, SMPWBs, and other relevant authorities to intensify monitoring of the registration process across states to prevent abuse of the system.

It also urged the intending pilgrims to remain vigilant and to be wary of any state agency still collecting new passports beyond its approved allocation, as such actions may indicate attempts to substitute already registered pilgrims.

According to the organisation, this caution is consistent with NAHCON’s recent public advisory, in which the commission warned the public against making fresh payments to any individual, group, or agency, stressing that payment for the 2026 Hajj has officially closed and that updates would only be communicated through its verified channels.

It emphasized that the urgent intervention by NAHCON is necessary to protect the integrity of the Hajj registration process and to safeguard the interests of pilgrims who have already paid the officially approved Hajj fare.

 By George Mgbeleke
The Senate has clarified that the electronic transmission of election results in real time does not translate to e-voting as being peddled in some quarters, noting that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) lacks the capacity to conduct e-voting at present.
 
The upper chamber further clarified that INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) “is not an e-voting platform, but a platform when the election results that have been manually counted and declared at the polling units are uploaded and publicised.”
 
Chairman, Senate Ad-hoc Panel to Review the 2026 Electoral Bill, Senator Adeniyi Adegbonmire made the clarifications on Arise News Channel on Thursday, explaining the difference between the electronic transmission of election results in real time and e-voting system.
 
The Senate had constituted the adhoc panel to review the report of its Committee on Electoral Matters; harmonise divergent views and address grey areas identified during the exercise. It also appointed Adegbonmire to lead the 7-man panel.
 
Speaking on the decision of the Senate on Thursday, Adegbonmire explained that Nigeria had not transitioned to an e-voting system contrary to what some people had insinuated or what some media platforms had reported.
 
He said: “People need to understand what real-time means. Real-time transmission can only happen if the INEC adopts an e-voting system. For now, INEC does not have the capability for e-voting. Maybe in two or three years, we can adopt e-voting. But as of today, INEC has not put an e-voting system in place.”
 
“This is the misconception that the media has brought into play. The provision you keep emphasising says the presiding officer will first fill the result manually in Form EC8A. It is the Form EC8A that has been filled manually and will be transmitted to IReV. If we change ‘transmit’ to ‘upload’ in the Electoral Bill, 2026, will it change anything? The answer is No.
 
Adegbonmire, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria and Chairman, Senate Committee on Judiciary, Human Rights and Legal Matters, further explained misconception about IReV, which according to him, should be corrected considering its implications for the country’s peaceful co-existence.
 
The lawmaker, therefore, pointed out that IReV “is not a voting platform. Rather, it is a platform meant to publicise election results already declared by the presiding officers at polling units across the federation.
 
“It is important, first of all, to understand what IReV does because there is a lot of misconception about it or deliberate misrepresentation of what it stands for. The Senate never said INEC should not use IReV for the 2027 elections. So, what is IReV? It is software developed by INEC to publicise results by INEC.
 
“IReV is not an e-voting platform as some people think. This is the misinformation some people are peddling. They keep saying when I want to see my vote. But in reality, IReV is a platform meant to publicise election results already declared at the polling units.
 
“This is not an emotional argument. I heard people say the version of the House of Representatives should be adopted. It is a sheer misconception. What does the version say? It simply says the presiding officer shall electronically transmit the result from each polling unit to the IReV portal in real time and such transmission shall be done after Form EC8A has been signed by the presiding officer and countersigned by the candidate or polling agent at the polling unit…”
 
He also, explained that IReV, as an electronic platform to display election results, had “a pattern of working, and the National Assembly cannot change the software by mere legislation. It was a sheer misconception to conclude that the Senate declined the use of IReV for the transmission of election results.”
 
“Whether we call it upload, transfer, or transmission, as far as it says IReV must be used, it will be used in the manner it was configured. That is the point I am making. You must first manually write out the figure. After you have written out the figure at the polling unit, then you can upload, transfer or transmit depending on the nomenclature we want to use.
 
“When you have not complied with the proper filling of Form EC8A, you cannot transfer, transmit or upload it. That is what people must understand. When you talk about transmission, it has nothing to do with the sanctity of the voting process. If you are given ballot paper to thumb print, it is counted manually after the election. It is not IReV or BVAS that count ballots. Vote count is manually done.
 
“In my own case, for instance, I come from Akure. I vote in Akure. All the electoral materials are brought into Akure two to three days before the election. They are kept in the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). The night before, they start transporting them to different locations across the state. In Ondo State, there are places where one has to travel for eight hours to get there. In some cases, they have to use boats to get to the riverine areas.
 
“This means voting cannot start at the time nationwide. In Akure, voting can start at 10:00 a.m. In other parts of the state, voting may not start until 2:00 p.m., even some at 4:00 p.m. in some cases. Most likely, they will finish the vote count by 10:00 p.m.
 
“In Akure, for instance, the presiding officers will upload election results at polling units at 4:00 p.m. because voting is concluded as scheduled. In Arugbo Ijaw, however, voting kicks off at 4:00 p.m. This is the reality in the country, and we must take it into consideration in our reforms. The truth of the matter is that you are not going to see how you voted on the IReV because it is not an e-voting platform
 
“What the Senate has done is that we do not want a situation in which somebody will come and say this man ought to have uploaded this result at 2:00 p.m. You and I know that it is not every time you put something on the Internet that will go through freely. If we are not careful, the smallest thing will spark an issue.
 
“If somebody said the election result was declared at 2:00 p.m, how did you put it on IReV at 7:00 p.m.? They will simply assume that the election results must have been rigged. The media need to be careful how you report all these issues.”

By Abdul-Ganiyy Akanbi

The Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria (SCSN) has clarified its recent call for the removal and prosecution of the Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan, insisting that the position was not driven by religious considerations but by concerns over national unity, institutional credibility and constitutional responsibility.

The Council made the clarification in a press statement issued by its Secretary General, Nafiu Baba Ahmad, following widespread public reactions to a communiqué released after its Annual Pre-Ramadan Conference and General Assembly held on January 28, 2026.

According to the SCSN, its resolution calling for Prof. Amupitan’s removal had been “amplified out of context and grossly misconstrued,” particularly as an attack motivated by religion.

“The Council states unequivocally that its position is not motivated by religion or sectarian considerations, but by grave concerns relating to national cohesion, institutional integrity, constitutionalism, sovereignty, and the dangerous trajectory trailing the Chairman’s antecedents,” the statement said.

The Council noted that Nigeria’s electoral history since independence shows that religion has never been a basis for opposition to electoral leadership, pointing out that most past heads of electoral bodies, including INEC, were Christians and were accepted without controversy.

It stated that out of the 13 chairmen who have headed Nigeria’s electoral institutions, only two — Prof. Attahiru Jega and Prof. Mahmood Yakubu — were Muslims, arguing that this historical record invalidates claims of religious bias.

The SCSN said its concern with Prof. Amupitan stems from a legal brief he reportedly authored in 2020, which it described as containing “toxic, provocative and deeply prejudicial assertions” against Nigerian Muslims, Northern Nigeria and the historic Sokoto Caliphate.

Of particular concern, the Council said, were claims of a so-called “Christian genocide” and attempts to link contemporary insecurity in Northern Nigeria to the 19th-century jihad of Sheikh Uthman bin Fodio, describing such assertions as historically inaccurate and destabilising.

“These claims are not only false but profoundly dangerous in a fragile, multi-religious federation such as Nigeria,” the statement added.

The Council also expressed concern that such claims were allegedly presented to foreign actors, portraying Nigeria as a theatre of religious extermination and inviting external pressure based on what it described as false premises.

According to the SCSN, credible humanitarian data show that insecurity in Northern Nigeria is complex and driven by terrorism, banditry, poverty, governance failures and criminality, stressing that both Muslims and Christians have been victims, with Muslims constituting the majority of casualties in many affected states.

It further noted that Prof. Amupitan has neither denied authorship of the controversial document nor issued a public apology or retraction since the issues were raised.

The Council claimed that the Federal Government had been forced to publicly debunk the allegations internationally, allegedly incurring financial and diplomatic costs, including reports of payments to foreign lobbyists to counter the narrative.

“In any responsible society, such consequences alone constitute sufficient grounds for resignation, removal and legal accountability,” the SCSN said.

The Council reiterated its call for constitutional and legal processes to be followed in addressing the matter, stressing that its position is based solely on issues of character, conduct and credibility, not religion.

It also appealed to the Christian community not to be misled by what it described as divisive narratives, reaffirming its commitment to peaceful coexistence, mutual respect and justice for all Nigerians, regardless of faith.