In every sense the Kenyan electoral process was reborn after the promulgation of the 2010 Constitution. We had to set up a new electoral commission, register political parties and voters afresh. Now the electoral wheel has been set in motion. With less than 54 days to go till the start of the elections, there still remains a number of critical aspects that need resolution before Kenyans can go to the Ballot.
The electoral process in Kenya allows for two avenues for citizens seeking elective politics are to engage. First is through the institutions of political parties and the second is through independent candidature provided under Article 85 of the Constitution. The former, being the most prevalent in Kenya, is one that has undergone a series of transformation since 2010. First was the de registration of parties which were not able to meet a new stringent set of conditions that were lined up under a revamped Political Parties Act. Second was the approach to general elections under coalitions. Previously in the past, coalition agreements were purely a private affair and which brought much acrimony on claims of reneged agreements made before elections. With the new Political Parties Act, all pre election agreements are required to be deposited with the Registrar of Political Parties. The third transformation is one albeit not so expressly provided for but one envisioned is one that demands internal democracy in the nomination process for candidates within a party. Indeed at the party primaries is where the litmus test of democracy is undertaken. These last two facets have been the cause of great political unease as politicians try to find mechanisms to be able to have a smooth process that assures a formidable matrix ahead of the elections.
The Elections Act demanded that all pre-election agreements need to be deposited by December 4th 2012. Several parties entered into coalitions and had their agreements deposited. Others lost for time ended up formulating agreements that are addendum to the formal coalition agreements. The benefits of pre election coalitions is the ability of the parties involved to negotiate for power sharing prior to the election and to have its constituent candidates be viewed as part of a larger political force to the electorate. Post election coalitions are mainly about galvanising power once elections are over especially when it comes to aspects to do with legislative control and influence in the Parliament and the county assemblies. These however can only be recognised upon deposit to the Registrar
Weeks after the formation of the various alliances the key question has remained as to what becomes of the nomination exercises for the various parties within the coalitions. A new political creature has evolved known as joint nominations which essentially entails bandying all political partners into a single nomination exercise for one position with the winner of that being the candidate bearer and all the constituent parties are not allowed to field candidates on their individual party ticket. Indeed this suggestion has left a sour taste in the mouths of constituent parties especially those that could be termed as the junior coalition partners. The big partners argue that the areas where joint nominations are to be held are regions where either the core parties have equal footing or little footing at all and thus a combined competition would yield the best result. In the areas where the core parties have dominance then the strongest party would be the one to solely undertake nominations under the coalition ticket. In finality no other constituent party can field a candidate under the coalition once the nominations are decided.
The truth of the matter is that neither Elections Act, Political Parties Act and The Constitution mention joint nominations and only assert that each political party needs to carry out nominations ahead of the elections. The constituent parties opposed to scenarios such as joint nominations or other mechanisms are by law free to go ahead and carry out nominations in areas where they see fit. Whether such action offends their coalition agreements will be a matter for the parties to decide. It can then be foreseen that parties within the coalitions upon realising that they have been aggrieved will look to seeking recourse either through internal dispute resolution mechanisms or through the Political Parties Dispute Tribunal. But is this even possible?
Practically speaking for the parties who have agreed to being in coalitions that have decided to hold undertake their nominations on the 17th of January 2013, they will in all reality have one day to undertake their nomination before close of the deadline. If they are to seek redress in the event that there is seen to be acrimony then the time frame to do so will be practically impossible unless the lodging of complaint and resolution process within the coalition is undertaken within 24 hours.
In the end, the nomination process will indeed be a true test of whether Kenya has matured in its quest for democracy. The nomination process will be the first step in testing suffrage in a country that once employed a 'mlolongo'(line up) system to undertake nominations and direct nominations in parties prevalent until recently.
As one observer has mentioned before, the days of January 17th & 18th 2013 will be critical to showing Kenyans whether they think they should be part of the electoral process or not and be a true show of whether the country is even remotely ready for an election as it all depends on whether the processes can be adjudged free and fair and whether the losers will accept defeat when it stares at them in their face.
What is your take?
Tuesday, January 8, 2013
Monday, January 7, 2013
Elections Watch: Voter Register Inspection
In every sense the Kenyan electoral process was reborn after the promulgation of the 2010 Constitution. We had to set up a new electoral commission, register political parties and voters afresh. Now the electoral wheel has been set in motion. With less than 54 days to go till the start of the elections, there still remains a number of critical aspects that need resolution before Kenyans can go to the Ballot.
Even with the IEBC being able to register 14.3 Million voters, which was about 4 million shy of its target, it is vital that the registered voters are able to confirm the details retained by the IEBC to prevent the eventuality of them being turned down from voting on election day.
This very important undertaking is yet to take off three weeks since the close of the voter registration exercise. Even worse is the fact that Kenyans have no idea that the process of voter register inspection and verification exists. Many Kenyans assume that with them having gone through a registration process that utilised the much hyped Bio Metric technology, then the accuracy of the process is assured to the highest degree. All this is indeed quite to the contrary. Voter register inspection is still very important regardless of the confidence levels in the technology employed especially considering that this is the first time a newly established commission has employed the technology relied upon. Every voter needs to verify that the details entered into the IEBC system correlates with their own personal information and the particular centres they intended to take out their vote.
Before the Elections Act was amended the Principal Register of Voters was meant to be opened for inspection within a span of 30 days. However, with the Elections (Amendment) (No.4) Act, 2012 becoming law, this process has been shortened to a record 14 days. Whether the IEBC can be able to actually be able to inform the 14.3 Million Registered voters of their need to inspect the Register for anomalies and have a substantial majority of them undertake the verification exercise in the 14 day period is a question that needs to be answered. Up until the date of publication of this post, there has been no word as to when the exercise is set to begin.
The only information available is the information contained in law and The Elections (Registration of Voters) Regulations, 2012 regulating the voter register inspection exercise. The regulations under Part V provide for avenues to follow especially when one needs to make a claim in the event that their name is not included in the register after having undergone the registration exercise. One is meant to submit a claim to the registration officer however according to the regulations Section 17(2), one cannot make such a claim within 90 days to the election. In keeping with this such a claim can only be made before the 4th of January. Unless the regulations are revised, then making of any such claim would be illegal.
As an engaged citizen it is important that you seek out information on the modality of confirming your voter details and the channels of redress. Once you know, help to let others know too.
Act of Convenience: Assessing the Amendments to Kenya's Elections Act towards the General Elections
When Kenyans adopted a new Constitution on the 27th of August 2012, they hoped that all the sins of the past would be left in the pages of history and thus mark the beginning of a new chapter for the Republic.
One of the key transformations hoped for was in the manner in which the electoral process would be handled in the future. It all began with the assessment that the election preceding the adoption of the constitution as being so fundamentally flawed that it would have been impossible to assert who may have won the Presidential election as other electoral positions.
What followed after the institution of the new constitution was the establishment of the successors to the disbanded Electoral Commission of Kenya, largely blamed for the bungled elections. These were known as the Interim Independent Electoral Commission and the the Interim Electoral Boundaries Commission which were later merged into the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission through a Statute. Additional to these changes was the enactment of two key pieces of legislation that would act to complement the work of the electoral commission these being the Political Parties Act and the Elections Act.
The Political Parties Act was enacted and came into operation on the 1st of November 2011 to instil discipline in what was a chaotic organisation in how parties were established and governed. Upon its enactment there were well over one hundred parties. After its enforcement only 51 parties could meet the tighter registration criteria. The Elections Act was a statute enacted and came into force on the 2nd of December 2011 to streamline the conduct of elections, general, referenda or otherwise.
Since their enactment the two pieces of legislation have have been targeted by legislators for a number of amendments many of which have been to cater for their interests ahead of the 2013 general elections. The Elections Act has seen a number of changes to it occur within a period of 13 months of its existence for purposes of politicians expedience as pointed out in a blog by political information website Mzalendo. The key changes that are catered to the politicians are those touching on the timelines that would allow the MPs to hop from one Party to another. Frankly, these changes have enabled the MPs to remain in their parties until the 14th of January 2014. The space between that date and the final allowed date for the carrying out party nominations is only four days. This is a clear example of politicians clinging to power to the very last straw.
Politicians however are not the only culprits in this game of mutilation of the Elections Act. Through the hand of Parliamentarians, the IEBC has been pushing for amendments to the Act in a manner that favours its haphazard operations. The latest has been in facilitating the period of voter register inspection from 30 days to 14 days and increasing the period within which IEBC is to make compilations from not less than 30 days to the election to read "at least 14 days to the election" This means amendments can even be done to the very last date.
It is sad that the 2013 elections are going to be an example in ill preparedness and expediency for large parties and incumbents. So far, IEBC has used the legislative process to seal loopholes in execution of its mandate working at the behest of the political elite. Kenyans must be vigilant to ensure that they monitor each of the activities of the politicians and IEBC and ensure that they conform with the law especially now that Parliament is in its dying days.
One of the key transformations hoped for was in the manner in which the electoral process would be handled in the future. It all began with the assessment that the election preceding the adoption of the constitution as being so fundamentally flawed that it would have been impossible to assert who may have won the Presidential election as other electoral positions.
What followed after the institution of the new constitution was the establishment of the successors to the disbanded Electoral Commission of Kenya, largely blamed for the bungled elections. These were known as the Interim Independent Electoral Commission and the the Interim Electoral Boundaries Commission which were later merged into the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission through a Statute. Additional to these changes was the enactment of two key pieces of legislation that would act to complement the work of the electoral commission these being the Political Parties Act and the Elections Act.
The Political Parties Act was enacted and came into operation on the 1st of November 2011 to instil discipline in what was a chaotic organisation in how parties were established and governed. Upon its enactment there were well over one hundred parties. After its enforcement only 51 parties could meet the tighter registration criteria. The Elections Act was a statute enacted and came into force on the 2nd of December 2011 to streamline the conduct of elections, general, referenda or otherwise.
Since their enactment the two pieces of legislation have have been targeted by legislators for a number of amendments many of which have been to cater for their interests ahead of the 2013 general elections. The Elections Act has seen a number of changes to it occur within a period of 13 months of its existence for purposes of politicians expedience as pointed out in a blog by political information website Mzalendo. The key changes that are catered to the politicians are those touching on the timelines that would allow the MPs to hop from one Party to another. Frankly, these changes have enabled the MPs to remain in their parties until the 14th of January 2014. The space between that date and the final allowed date for the carrying out party nominations is only four days. This is a clear example of politicians clinging to power to the very last straw.
Politicians however are not the only culprits in this game of mutilation of the Elections Act. Through the hand of Parliamentarians, the IEBC has been pushing for amendments to the Act in a manner that favours its haphazard operations. The latest has been in facilitating the period of voter register inspection from 30 days to 14 days and increasing the period within which IEBC is to make compilations from not less than 30 days to the election to read "at least 14 days to the election" This means amendments can even be done to the very last date.
It is sad that the 2013 elections are going to be an example in ill preparedness and expediency for large parties and incumbents. So far, IEBC has used the legislative process to seal loopholes in execution of its mandate working at the behest of the political elite. Kenyans must be vigilant to ensure that they monitor each of the activities of the politicians and IEBC and ensure that they conform with the law especially now that Parliament is in its dying days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)