Under fire, INEC gives reasons for AI photos in voters’ register

Nigeria’s electoral commission has acknowledged concerns over suspected artificial intelligence-generated photographs in the preliminary voters’ register, saying it had identified questionable records during an earlier physical display but that its online publication did not reflect the data-cleanup process already under way.

In a statement on Tuesday, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) said the register uploaded to its website on October 26 was the same preliminary register displayed at Registration Areas nationwide from October 9 to 15.

The commission said some questionable registration records were identified and flagged during the physical exercise, prompting a review and efforts to make corrections.

“The online publication represents the original preliminary register and does not reflect all ongoing data-cleanup activities,” said Mohammed Kudu Haruna, chairman of INEC’s Information and Voter Education Committee.

INEC added that it was investigating the circumstances surrounding the suspicious photographs, including possible technical or procedural lapses, and would take action based on verified findings.

But the explanation leaves key questions unanswered: how did the photographs enter the register, what verification procedures failed to detect them earlier, and how many records may be affected?

Questions over the integrity of the register

The controversy erupted after INEC uploaded the preliminary register online, following public pressure for Nigerians to have wider access to the document ahead of the 2027 general election.

Screenshots circulated on social media showing voter records in Etsako West Local Government Area of Edo State with photographs suspected of being AI-generated. Other complaints included alleged duplicate entries and the appearance of deceased persons in the register.

These allegations have not, by themselves, established that the records were deliberately fabricated or that electoral fraud occurred. But they have raised questions about the accuracy of a document central to determining who can vote.

The register is still preliminary, and the public display exercise is designed to allow voters to identify errors and submit claims or objections before certification. INEC says the final register is scheduled for certification on December 15, 2026.

That process, however, does not remove the need to explain how the questionable records got there in the first place. Public scrutiny can help identify errors, but it is not a substitute for effective verification by the institution responsible for maintaining the register.

Trust deficit

The latest controversy comes as INEC faces the challenge of rebuilding public confidence after the disputed 2023 general election, when it failed to upload all presidential polling-unit results to its Result Viewing Portal, IReV. It later announced wrong results from some areas including Rivers state.

The commission subsequently described the failure as a technical “glitch”. Its own post-election review acknowledged problems with the system used to upload presidential results, including errors associated with how results were mapped to polling units.

The failure fuelled widespread criticism and suspicion during an election in which the timely public display of polling-unit results had been presented as an important transparency measure.

The suspected AI photographs do not establish that the same kind of failure – or deliberate manipulation – has occurred in the voters’ register. The two issues concern different systems and processes. But both put the commission’s data-management safeguards and its ability to demonstrate transparency under scrutiny.