The Electoral Committee of the Nigerian Bar Association (ECNBA) has announced the shortlisting of six technology companies for the management of IT operations, development, and supervision of a secure digital platform for electronic voting in the 2026 NBA National Elections, scheduled for July 20, 2026.
The announcement, made in a notice dated May 18, 2026, and signed by the ECNBA Chairman, Aham Ejelam, SAN, and Secretary, Aliyu Nassarawa, Esq., has however triggered sharp reactions from members of the Nigerian Bar Association, with lawyers raising questions about the transparency of the procurement process, demanding to know when the tender was publicly advertised, and calling for investigation into the ownership of the shortlisted companies.
In the notice addressed to members of the Bar, the ECNBA stated that it issued a Request for Proposal (RFP/ECNBA/ESP/2026) on April 21, 2026, inviting competent technology companies to submit bids for the management of the electronic voting platform. The committee said it acted pursuant to the powers vested in it under Part II of the Second Schedule to the NBA Constitution 2015 (as amended in 2025).
The ECNBA disclosed that a total of 19 bids were received and subjected to a rigorous review and evaluation on May 14, 2026. From the 19 submissions, six service providers were shortlisted as having met the minimum technical and eligibility requirements prescribed in the RFP.
The six shortlisted companies are: Lumix Solutions Ltd; Twinslight Technologies Ltd; Top-Tech I.T Resources Nigeria Limited; Mikrodigital Connect; Thanelinc Nigeria Limited; and Cinfores Limited.
The ECNBA stated that before a final decision is made on which company will be engaged, the six shortlisted entities will be subjected to a further stage of the selection process involving interviews by necessary stakeholders as provided for in the NBA Constitution. A separate notice will be issued regarding that stage, the committee said.
The ECNBA’s announcement, rather than reassuring members of the Bar about the integrity of the upcoming election, has instead provoked a wave of concern and criticism from lawyers who question the manner in which the entire procurement process was conducted.
Several lawyers have accused the ECNBA of operating in secrecy, alleging that the committee developed a website and conducted significant stages of the procurement process without adequate public notice to members of the Bar.
One lawyer questioned the openness of the tender process itself, asking when exactly the ECNBA publicly called for tenders and how the 19 firms that submitted bids became aware of the opportunity. The lawyer argued that a process of this importance — selecting the technology platform that will determine how over 100,000 lawyers vote to choose their national leaders — should have been widely publicised across all NBA branches, sections, and communication channels, rather than conducted in what the lawyer described as a manner that left most members unaware until after the shortlisting was complete.
“When did they call for this tender? How did these firms know to submit? They just developed a website and started doing things in hiding without the public knowing what is going on. This is the NBA, not a private company. Every member has a right to know how the election infrastructure is being procured,” the lawyer stated.
The concerns have escalated to the point where some lawyers are reportedly calling on their colleagues to boycott the July 20 election entirely if the transparency issues are not addressed. These lawyers argue that an election conducted on a platform selected through an opaque process cannot be trusted to produce a credible outcome, and that participating in such an exercise would amount to legitimising a fundamentally flawed process.
The calls for boycott echo broader anxieties within the NBA about the conduct of the current ECNBA, which is already the subject of a formal petition filed before the NBA Board of Trustees by Tosan Barbara Onwubiko, Esq. of toSAN Legals, alleging constitutional breaches in the candidate qualification process, including the alleged unlawful inclusion of a candidate who did not comply with mandatory requirements, the concealment of names of nominators and disqualified aspirants, and a pattern of procedural irregularities linked to the ECNBA Secretary, Mr Aliyu Nassarawa the same official who co-signed the shortlisting notice.
Other lawyers have focused their concerns on the shortlisted companies themselves, calling for a thorough investigation into the ownership, track records, and affiliations of the six firms before any contract is awarded.
One lawyer drew attention to past NBA elections, alleging that in previous cycles, the electoral committee engaged technology companies that were already known to certain members of the committee or aligned with particular candidates, effectively giving those candidates an unfair advantage through control of the election infrastructure.
“In the past, they have used companies they already know and tell them what to do. That is why lawyers must investigate this list. Who owns Lumix Solutions? Who owns Twinslight Technologies? Who are the directors of Top-Tech, Mikrodigital, Thanelinc, and Cinfores? Every member of the NBA should investigate and know who owns these companies before we allow them to handle our election,” the lawyer said.
The lawyer argued that the integrity of the electronic voting platform is the single most critical factor in determining whether the NBA election will be free and fair. If the platform is controlled by a company with ties to any aspirant, faction, or member of the ECNBA itself, the entire election could be compromised at the technological level with manipulation potentially occurring in ways that are invisible to ordinary voters.
“Everyone should investigate and know who owns the companies that have been shortlisted. The future of the NBA depends on who controls the voting platform. If we get this wrong, the election is already rigged before a single vote is cast,” the lawyer warned.
The fact that Aliyu Nassarawa, Esq. co-signed the shortlisting notice has not gone unnoticed by critics. Nassarawa is the same ECNBA Secretary who is the subject of allegations in the Onwubiko petition, which accused him of facilitating actions during the NBA-SPIDEL elections that resulted in the removal of duly screened candidates and the inclusion of non-members and disqualified aspirants.
Lawyers who raised this concern argue that the combination of the petition allegations against Nassarawa and the opacity of the current procurement process creates a crisis of confidence in the ECNBA’s ability to deliver a credible election.
“The same person who is accused of manipulating the SPIDEL elections is now co-signing the selection of the company that will run the national election platform. How can members have confidence in this process?” one lawyer asked.
The ECNBA’s notice did not address any of the transparency concerns that have since been raised. The committee’s statement was limited to announcing the shortlist and informing members that the next stage would involve interviews by stakeholders as provided for in the Constitution.
The reference to stakeholder interviews suggests that the final selection will not be made solely by the ECNBA but will involve input from other bodies within the NBA’s governance structure. However, the ECNBA did not specify which stakeholders would participate in the interview process, when the interviews would be conducted, or whether the final selection would be made public before the contract is awarded.
The controversy over the electronic voting platform procurement adds another layer of uncertainty to the 2026 NBA National Elections, which are already facing challenges over the candidate qualification process, allegations of constitutional breaches, and calls for the dissolution of the ECNBA.
The NBA election, which will determine the next president and national officers of Africa’s largest bar association, is scheduled for July 20, 2026 approximately two months away. The selection, contracting, testing, and deployment of the electronic voting platform within that timeframe will be a significant logistical challenge, even without the current controversies.
If the transparency concerns are not addressed and the calls for boycott gain momentum, the legitimacy of the July 20 election could be severely undermined before voting even begins.
