Asiwaju Kunle Kalejaye, SAN
Eagle 102.5 FM, Ilese-Ijebu
By TDTM
The Permanent Voter’s Card (PVC) has undergone a remarkable transformation in Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence—from a simple identification document to a critical component of the legal architecture underpinning the electoral process.
The evolution has been shaped by judicial decisions, technological innovation and, ultimately, legislative intervention through the Electoral Act 2026, which repealed the 2022 Electoral Act following presidential assent on February 18, 2026.
Under the new legal regime, the PVC is no longer merely an identification card. It has become part of a broader electoral verification system involving voter identity, biometric authentication, accreditation and electronic transmission of election results.
When Technology Could Not Override the Law
The early legal anatomy of the PVC was defined by a struggle between technological innovation and statutory provisions.
During the 2015 election cycle, the courts were emphatic that technology could not replace the law. In Okereke v. Umahi (2016), the Supreme Court held that because the guidelines authorising the use of the Card Reader were made pursuant to the Electoral Act, the Card Reader could not replace the Voters’ Register, whose legal foundation was firmly established in the Act.
Okoro, JSC, succinctly explained that the function of the Card Reader was to authenticate the owner of a voter’s card and that it had not replaced the Voters’ Register.
The position was reinforced in Wike v. Peterside (2016). Although the Supreme Court acknowledged the importance of Card Readers, it held that the technology could not supersede the Voters’ Register, noting that existing laws provided for the use of the register, while the Card Reader, despite its importance, had no direct statutory basis at the time.
The implication was clear: the PVC was important, but it was not yet sovereign. It depended on the manual Voters’ Register for its legal force, and failure to use a Card Reader could not, by itself, invalidate an election.
The Legislature Changes the Rules
The 2022 Electoral Act, and now the 2026 Electoral Act, represent the legislature’s response to that judicial position.
Following calls for electoral laws to be amended to incorporate electronic accreditation and other technologies into the statutory framework, the National Assembly acted.
Under the 2026 Act, the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) is no longer simply an innovation introduced through INEC guidelines. It has become part of the statutory framework governing elections.
The Supreme Court had already begun to recognise the growing evidential importance of BVAS in cases such as Shinkafi v. Yari and subsequently Oyetola v. INEC (2023).
The courts recognised that BVAS data could perform important functions in verifying PVCs and authenticating voters through biometric information. The implication was particularly significant in cases involving allegations of over-voting, where BVAS accreditation data became increasingly important evidence.
Atiku v. INEC and the Transmission Question
The issue of electronic transmission became particularly prominent in the 2023 presidential election litigation.
In Atiku v. INEC, the petitioners argued that Sections 64(4) and (5) of the Electoral Act 2022 made electronic transmission of results through BVAS and the IReV portal mandatory.
The Supreme Court, however, held that the 2022 Act did not contain a mandatory and exclusive requirement for the electronic transmission of election results.
As Abubakar, JSC, stated, the deployment of BVAS and the IReV portal did not, by itself, alter the legal position because neither the Electoral Act nor the applicable regulations and guidelines made electronic transmission or collation mandatory in the manner contended by the petitioners.
The 2026 Electoral Act now seeks to close that gap.
Three Layers of Electoral Identity
Under the new legal framework, the significance of the PVC can be understood through three interconnected layers: identity, verification and transmission.
First is identity. The voter must establish his or her electoral identity through the legally prescribed accreditation process.
Second is verification. BVAS provides biometric authentication and generates data that can be used to establish whether voters were properly accredited.
Third is transmission. The new statutory framework gives electronic transmission of polling-unit results a clearer legal foundation, including recognition of the IReV platform and prescribed sanctions for wilfully frustrating the process.
The transformation is significant. Where the courts once held that administrative guidelines could not override statutory provisions, the new law has incorporated technological requirements directly into the statutory framework.
From Voters’ Register to Digital Evidence
The evolution of Nigeria’s electoral technology therefore represents more than a change in voting equipment.
The courts initially protected the Voters’ Register from being displaced by technology because the law had not yet given the technology equivalent statutory status.
The legislature has now moved in the opposite direction by making technology an integral part of electoral legality.
The PVC has consequently evolved from being merely complementary to the Voters’ Register into a critical gateway to the accreditation process.
BVAS authentication creates an electronic record of accreditation, while electronic transmission creates another layer of evidence capable of being examined in an electoral dispute.
The small rectangle carried by millions of Nigerians has therefore acquired a significance far beyond its physical size.
The PVC and the Sovereignty of the People
Section 14(2)(a) of the 1999 Constitution provides that sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria, from whom government derives its powers and authority.
The PVC is, in practical terms, one of the instruments through which that constitutional sovereignty is exercised.
It represents the voter’s legal gateway into the electoral process and, ultimately, the transfer of political power through the ballot.
Under the emerging legal framework, that process is increasingly protected by biometric authentication, electronic documentation and judicially examinable digital evidence.
Democracy, therefore, does not reside only in Aso Rock, the National Assembly or government offices. Its legitimacy begins with the ordinary Nigerian voter and the legal processes through which that voter expresses a choice.
The Chain of Electoral Custody
In this sense, the PVC does more than authorise a voter to participate in an election. It initiates a chain of custody that is both physical and digital.
The voter presents the PVC, the presiding officer conducts accreditation, BVAS authenticates the voter, the ballot is cast and the result is recorded on the appropriate electoral form.
The result is then expected to enter the prescribed electronic transmission process, creating a digital record that can become relevant in determining the integrity of the election.
When that chain is compromised through voter suppression, inducement, unlawful possession or purchase of PVCs, failure of accreditation procedures, manipulation or failure to comply with prescribed transmission requirements, the consequences may extend beyond mere procedural irregularities.
What is ultimately at stake is the integrity of the people’s mandate.
The history of Nigeria’s electoral jurisprudence therefore reveals a fascinating journey: technology first had to submit to the law; the law has now incorporated technology as part of the electoral process.
The PVC has consequently moved from being a simple card in a voter’s wallet to becoming part of a sophisticated legal and technological chain through which the sovereignty of the people is expressed, recorded and, where necessary, tested before the courts.
Tags:
Electoral Act 2026, PVC, Permanent Voter’s Card, BVAS, INEC, IReV, Electronic Transmission, Voters’ Register, Electoral Reform, Nigerian Elections, Election Law, Election Technology, Voter Accreditation, Electoral Jurisprudence, Supreme Court, Atiku v INEC, Oyetola v INEC, Wike v Peterside, Shinkafi v Yari, Okereke v Umahi, Voter Sovereignty, Asiwaju Kunle Kalejaye, Eagle 102.5 FM, Nigeria Politics
