With three months to go, how prepared is Kenya for polls?

Much as we are constantly implored to hope for the best, we are also, in the same breath, similarly cautioned to prepare for the worst. In Kenya’s multiparty electoral experience, the hope is that we could hope to experience the euphoric high of the 2002 General Election and, on the other hand, prepare to avoid or prevent the abject worst of the shambolic 2007 polls. The other general elections have been in between, giving us a traffic light electoral preparedness scorecard of the good (green), the bad (amber) and the ugly (red).

Assessment Criteria

But what criteria are we to use to assess where we are on this assessment format of the good, the bad and the ugly? Please refer to Article 81 of our Constitution. In this Article are to be found the general principles of the electoral system, namely: freedom of citizens to exercise their political rights under Article 38; not more than two-thirds of the members of the elective public bodies shall be of the same gender; fair representation of persons with disabilities; universal suffrage based on the aspiration for fair representation and equality of the vote; and free and fair elections, which are by secret ballot, freedom from violence and intimidation; improper influence or corruption; conducted by an independent body; transparent; and administered in an impartial, neutral, efficient, accurate and accountable manner.

The Good (Green)

Of these requirements, in my view, only the two directing that citizens enjoy their political rights under Article 38 (1) and (3) have mustered a “Good” grade. Under Article 38 (1), every citizen is free to make political choices which include the right to form, or participate in forming a political party; the right to participate in the activities of, or recruit members for, a political party; and the right to campaign for a political party or cause.

Under Article 38(3), every adult citizen has the right without unreasonable restrictions to register as a voter; to vote by secret ballot in any election or referendum; and to be a candidate for within a political party of which the citizen is a member and, if elected, to hold office.

Admittedly though not yet fully fulfilled, the current state of affairs with regard to these two constitutional criteria is strong.

The Bad (Amber)

In my assessment, none of the criteria has attained this level of attainment.

The Ugly (Red)

The bulk of the criteria, regrettably, fall under this category. The gender parity principle, where not more than two-thirds of the members of elective public bodies can be from the same gender, is demonstrably and manifestly being violated; a recent Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) memo to political parties testifies to this fact.

Nor are we faring any better on the requirement that there is fair representation of persons with disabilities.

The requirement of universal suffrage based on the aspiration of fair representation and equality of vote is compromised by poor arrangements for diaspora voting, lack of any preparations to assist to register and vote for those displaced by violence such as that witnessed in Baringo County, and obviously, historical inequitable arrangements that manifested as gerrymandering.

And whereas the elections will be held by secret ballot, they will not be free from violence, intimidation, improper influence or corruption. A cursory review of the recently-concluded political party nominations witnessed egregious cases of violence and the inequitable leveraging of state and personal illegally-obtained resources.

The political class pugnaciously rejected the IEBC’s attempts to regulate campaign financing and very clearly the proceeds of corruption will be utilised to corrupt the electorate.

The watering down of the provisions of Chapter 6 of the Constitution means that those who are corrupt find easy reward in politics.

State capture

Deep, grave, credible and yet-unresolved questions have, through time, been raised, right from its inception, about the independence of the IEBC; despite its own name boasting this trait.

In elections and by-elections since 2013, it has been demonstrated that the IEBC has suffered state capture and in 2022, it is yet to liberate itself from the perception that it is still a victim of this reputational and operational albatross.

The question of electoral transparency remains a huge challenge all around: Which register(s) will be used? Which electronic system(s) to relay results will be used? How secure are these systems?

Objectivity

Things nosedive when the requirement that elections must be administered in an impartial, neutral, efficient, accurate and accountable manner for nothing in the past or currently on-going speaks empirically to this being attained. Are the police impartial? Will we receive accurate results this time? How accountable is the IEBC, for instance?

It does not help that those agencies that should help monitor and track some of these requirements, such as independent commissions, all suffer the blight of state capture. The Judiciary also falls within the ambit of this characterisation. On the other side of the fence, civil society, the media and religious groups are seen to have taken sides despite their own protestations of objectivity and impartiality.

The digital space remains radio-actively toxic and deluged with misinformation. Fake stories are constantly emerging as propaganda has been ramped up through a medium that is constantly mercilessly spewing untruths, falsehoods and hurtful information.

This is a global phenomenon but that notwithstanding, it does deleterious damage to holding a free, fair and credible election.

Moreover, the lack of civic or electoral or political education plays a huge nugatory role in ensuring that citizens are guided by the national interest as affirmed by the national values and principles of governance under Article 10 of the Constitution of Kenya.

Although the picture that emerges is pretty bleak, all is not lost! Eternal vigilance, we note, is the price of democracy. Continued tracking, monitoring and challenging of all these deficits needs to continue, at even more intense levels.

We must keep on questioning those responsible for ensuring that elections are free, fair, credible and peaceful. We must be the change we want to see. For perish the thought of another electoral cataclysm as experienced in 2007: our past must not be prologue.

Mugambi Kiai is the regional director of Article 19, Eastern and Horn of Africa. The views contained here are his own and do not represent those of Article 19