All Eyes on the Ballot: Centre LSD’s Push to Protect Nigeria’s Democratic Mandate

By Monday Osasah

With the 2027 elections approaching, Centre LSD is demanding measurable accountability across the electoral cycle. Its “All Eyes on Electoral Credibility” initiative seeks to connect institutional preparedness with citizens’ freedom to participate, verify results, and protect their mandate.

A ballot paper carries a citizen’s choice. Protecting that choice begins long before it enters a ballot box and continues long after voting ends.

It begins with an accurate voters’ register, accessible registration and the freedom to support a candidate without fear. It depends on trained electoral officials, functioning equipment, transparent results and institutions willing to answer difficult questions.

This is the challenge the African Centre for Leadership, Strategy & Development (Centre LSD) is placing before Nigeria as preparations advance towards the 2027 General Elections: credible elections must be demonstrated throughout the electoral cycle.

In a statement dated 4 November 2026, Centre LSD, alongside ActionAid Nigeria, Abuja School and Political Thoughts, and MOTION and Partners, expressed concern about unresolved questions surrounding electoral preparedness, public trust and the protection of the people’s mandate.

The intervention comes ahead of the Presidential and National Assembly elections scheduled for 16 January 2027, followed by Governorship and State Houses of Assembly elections on 6 February. The approaching dates leave a limited window for institutions to address concerns and demonstrate that improvements are working.

Earning Public Trust Through Accountability

At the centre of the organisations’ concern is the relationship between institutional assurances and citizens’ experience. An announcement that preparations are progressing means little to a voter who cannot establish whether registration details are correct, understand how results will be handled or feel safe enough to participate.

Centre LSD argues that Nigeria must deliberately establish the conditions for free, fair, transparent, inclusive and credible elections.

“Public trust cannot be demanded; it must be earned through verifiable institutional conduct,” the organisation states.

That principle shapes its call for INEC to provide regular, comprehensive updates covering logistics, staffing, technology, procurement and funding. Such disclosure would help citizens and election stakeholders assess progress, identify gaps and press for action before operational failures become polling-day emergencies.

The Centre also wants independent technical scrutiny of critical electoral systems, with accessible summaries of findings. The purpose is to open readiness to informed examination and give the public evidence on which confidence can rest.

For electoral personnel, preparedness must extend beyond instructions. Officials, including ad hoc staff, need training, supervision and protection from intimidation. The quality of an election depends partly on whether those administering it understand their responsibilities and can perform them without partisan pressure.

Making Every Result Traceable

Few issues illustrate the importance of clarity more sharply than election technology.

In its statement, Centre LSD identifies the controversy surrounding result transmission and public access to polling-unit results after the 2023 elections as a continuing source of distrust. It calls for an unambiguous explanation of the complete result-management process under the applicable law and INEC’s guidelines.

Citizens need to understand how BVAS accreditation connects with the recording of polling-unit results, electronic transmission, publication on IReV and subsequent collation. They also need to know what happens when equipment or communications fail, who records such failures and how discrepancies are resolved.

The Centre proposes transparent simulations involving political parties, civil society organisations, technical experts and the media. Such exercises could expose weaknesses while there is still time to correct them.

A technology demonstration becomes useful when it answers practical questions. Can officials operate the equipment correctly? Can the public trace a result? Can an error be detected and resolved through a clear process?

For Centre LSD, every polling-unit result should be traceable and verifiable, with public access that supports scrutiny.

Strengthening the Voters’ Register

The voters’ register presents another test of credibility.

INEC has itself acknowledged concerns including duplicate registrations, deceased persons, registration by ineligible people and incomplete or inaccurate records. Its published statements have recognised the need to strengthen the register.

Centre LSD’s statement raises further concerns about deceased registrants and suspicious records. The scale of these problems requires transparent investigation. Estimates of how many deceased people remain on the register should be supported by a published methodology and independent verification.

The underlying issue deserves a clear institutional response: citizens need to know how substantiated errors are identified, investigated and corrected.

An inaccurate register can distort interpretations of participation and create uncertainty about electoral planning. However, an erroneous entry does not, by itself, establish that an unlawful vote has been cast. Register accuracy and effective accreditation must both receive attention.

Centre LSD is therefore calling for a credible audit, accessible channels for claims and objections, and clear explanations of biometric verification and data-cleaning procedures. Public scrutiny must also protect personal data and avoid the wrongful removal of eligible voters.

Opening the Political Space

Electoral credibility has an equally important human dimension: who can participate, and on what terms?

A woman discouraged from seeking a nomination by prohibitive costs, a young aspirant excluded from party decisions, or a voter with a disability unable to access a polling environment faces a barrier that affects the quality of representation.

Centre LSD’s position is that inclusion must extend beyond registration and voting. It must encompass opportunities to contest elections, influence political party structures and contribute to policy decisions.

The statement calls on parties to remove discriminatory barriers, reduce nomination costs and create meaningful opportunities for women and young people. It also urges accessible polling environments, appropriate assistive materials and voter education tailored to persons with disabilities.

Its support for renewed attention to proposed reserved seats for women forms part of a broader demand for institutions that better reflect the population they serve.

All Eyes on Electoral Credibility

These concerns are now being brought together through Centre LSD’s “All Eyes on Electoral Credibility” initiative.

According to the statement, the organisation has activated its Electoral Credibility Analysis Centre as an operational hub for coordinating election programming and assessing integrity before, during and after voting.

The Centre plans to produce Monthly Electoral Credibility Reports to inform public debate, identify emerging concerns and support timely stakeholder responses.

The THRIVE Approach

Its work will be guided by the Election Credibility Index, also known as the THRIVE Index, which examines six interconnected dimensions:

Transparency: Openness, accountability and the ability to verify electoral processes.
Healthy Environment: Peaceful, secure conditions that allow participation without intimidation.
Reforms: The adequacy and implementation of electoral laws, regulations and institutional improvements.
Inclusivity: Meaningful participation by women, youth, persons with disabilities and marginalised groups.
Voter and Political Education: Citizens’ knowledge, democratic values and resistance to vote buying and disinformation.
Equipment Functionality: The reliability of technology, logistics, materials and operational systems.

Together, these dimensions connect election procedures with the conditions under which citizens experience them. Reliable equipment matters alongside informed voters. Transparent processes matter alongside safe participation. Reforms matter when institutions implement them consistently.

Turning Monitoring into Action

Centre LSD’s proposed interventions include citizen-led monitoring, voter and political education, violence early warning, scrutiny of party primaries and campaign finance, and advocacy for accountability.

It also plans to work with partners to strengthen citizens’ ability to document and verify polling-unit results independently and report violations through lawful channels.

These commitments place responsibilities on Centre LSD too. Its assessments will need clear methods, credible evidence and consistent standards across parties and institutions. Monthly reports will be most useful when they explain what has been observed, what remains uncertain and what action is required.

A Shared Responsibility for Credible Elections

The wider responsibility extends across Nigeria’s democratic institutions.

Political parties must respect internal democracy, reject intimidation and vote buying, and deploy properly accredited agents. Security agencies must protect voters and electoral personnel impartially. The judiciary must resolve disputes fairly and promptly. The media must test political claims and resist misinformation. Development partners can support sustained institutional accountability and participation.

Citizens also have responsibilities before and after polling day: checking registration information through authorised processes, seeking reliable electoral information, rejecting vote selling, reporting intimidation and following results through lawful, verifiable channels.

Yet public vigilance cannot substitute for institutional duty. Citizens should not have to risk their lives to compensate for failures of protection or transparency.

Protecting the Voice of the Voter

Centre LSD’s intervention places a practical challenge before every stakeholder: identify what must work, show that it works and respond openly when it does not.

The significance of “All Eyes on Electoral Credibility” will be measured by whether its monitoring helps turn concerns into timely corrections, stronger safeguards and greater public confidence.

For the Nigerian standing in a voting queue, the promise of democracy is immediate and personal: the freedom to choose, the safety to participate and the assurance that the choice will be recorded faithfully.

Those conditions must be secured before election day, protected during voting and sustained through the declaration of results and resolution of disputes.