Atiku demands disclosure of companies printing INEC ballot papers as scrutiny intensifies ahead of 2027 elections

By Marynne Opene

With Nigeria's 2027 general elections approaching, attention is increasingly shifting from the politicians seeking public office to the institutions and processes responsible for determining the outcome of the contest. Former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar has raised questions about the companies involved in printing ballot papers and other sensitive election materials, demanding that the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) disclose the details of its arrangements to Nigerians.

The demand has brought an important aspect of election preparation into public discussion at a time when confidence in electoral institutions remains central to the country's democratic process. While political parties are preparing for another round of intense competition, questions about the procurement and production of ballot papers have highlighted the need for clarity about how sensitive election materials are handled before they reach polling stations.

Atiku, through his representatives, has asked INEC to confirm or deny reports that Hitech or a company associated with it secured a contract to print sensitive materials for the 2027 elections. He has also called for the disclosure of all companies involved in the production of election materials, the scope of their contracts, the procurement procedures followed and the safeguards established to protect the process.

The former vice-president's demand follows reports suggesting that some of the printing responsibilities may have been assigned to private companies, including a firm reportedly based in France. There have also been questions about the reported division of responsibilities between private contractors and the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Plc, the country's state-owned security printing company.

These reports have generated questions about the extent to which the arrangements have been made public and whether Nigerians have sufficient information to understand how the commission intends to safeguard the production of ballot papers. However, the claims surrounding the reported contracts require official clarification, and the existence of a private contractor would not, on its own, establish wrongdoing.

At the heart of the controversy is a question that extends beyond the identity of any particular company: how much information should the public have about the arrangements governing the production of materials that determine the outcome of an election?

Ballot papers are among the most sensitive materials in an electoral process. Their production requires careful planning, strict access controls and procedures designed to prevent unauthorised printing, duplication, theft or interference. From the moment printing begins until materials are delivered to designated locations, every stage must be governed by safeguards that protect the credibility of the election.

For that reason, the companies entrusted with such responsibilities must satisfy the relevant technical, contractual and security requirements. Their selection should follow established procedures, while the commission must be able to demonstrate that appropriate controls exist to protect the materials throughout the process.

Atiku's demand for disclosure reflects the importance of public accountability in this area. Nigerians may not need access to every operational detail that could compromise election security, but they have a legitimate interest in understanding how contractors are selected, what responsibilities they receive and how INEC ensures compliance with the rules.

Transparency is particularly important when the process involves public resources and decisions that could affect confidence in the electoral outcome. Clear information can help distinguish legitimate procurement arrangements from speculation, allowing political parties, election observers and citizens to assess the available evidence.

The controversy has also drawn attention to questions about the relationship between private contractors and public institutions. If sensitive election materials are assigned to private companies, INEC must be able to explain the reasons for its decisions, the standards applied during contractor selection and the measures used to monitor performance.

• The involvement of a domestic or foreign company does not automatically determine whether an arrangement is appropriate. What matters is whether the contractor has the necessary capacity, whether the selection process complies with applicable requirements and whether adequate safeguards are in place. These are questions that can be answered through documentation, official explanations and independent scrutiny.

Atiku has also questioned recent personnel changes within INEC, particularly appointments and redeployments involving departments responsible for electoral operations and information technology. He has called on the commission to explain the criteria behind the decisions and address concerns about whether the changes followed due process.

The questions add another dimension to the debate over election preparations. Electoral institutions depend not only on secure materials and reliable technology but also on officials who understand their responsibilities and carry them out impartially. Decisions involving personnel in sensitive departments therefore attract public interest, especially during the period leading to a general election.

Nevertheless, questions about appointments should be examined on the basis of evidence. A transfer or redeployment does not, by itself, establish political interference, just as an allegation of improper influence does not prove that such interference occurred. INEC's explanations and the relevant records are necessary to determine whether the decisions followed established procedures.

The commission faces the challenge of addressing these concerns without compromising legitimate security requirements. A detailed account of its procurement process, the identities and responsibilities of its contractors where disclosure is appropriate, and the mechanisms for monitoring sensitive materials would provide a clearer basis for public assessment.

For political parties, the issue presents an opportunity to scrutinise election preparations before voting begins rather than waiting until disputes emerge after the results have been announced. Early engagement can help identify unanswered questions, encourage corrective action where necessary and reduce the risk of avoidable controversy during the election period.

However, such scrutiny must remain grounded in verifiable information. Political claims about election preparations can influence public perception long before the facts are fully established. Responsible reporting and official responses are therefore essential to ensuring that legitimate questions do not become confused with unproven conclusions.

For ordinary Nigerians, the debate is significant because confidence in elections is built through more than what happens on election day. Voters must have reason to believe that the process, from registration and ballot production to voting, collation and the announcement of results, is administered according to established rules.

That confidence cannot be secured through assurances alone. It requires institutions that explain their decisions, respond to reasonable questions and demonstrate that procedures are applied consistently. When concerns arise, timely disclosure of relevant information can help prevent uncertainty from becoming a wider crisis of confidence.

At the same time, transparency must operate alongside election security. Publishing sensitive operational information without proper safeguards could create risks of its own. The responsibility of INEC is therefore to provide meaningful accountability while protecting details that could expose the process to interference.

• As the 2027 elections draw closer, the central issue is whether the commission can provide clear answers about the arrangements for printing ballot papers and other sensitive materials. Nigerians deserve to know how the contractors were selected, what responsibilities they have been assigned and what safeguards are in place to protect the integrity of the process.

Atiku's demand has brought these questions into sharper focus, but the answers must ultimately come from evidence rather than political suspicion. If the reported arrangements are consistent with established procedures, INEC has an opportunity to explain them and address public concerns. If weaknesses are identified, the period before the election offers an opportunity to correct them.

The credibility of an election is shaped long before the first voter arrives at a polling unit. It depends on the decisions made during preparation, the standards applied to contractors, the conduct of electoral officials and the willingness of institutions to account for their actions.

For INEC, the task is not merely to organise the 2027 elections but to demonstrate that the process is transparent, secure and open to legitimate scrutiny. The public's confidence will depend not only on the assurances the commission offers but also on the evidence it provides to support them.