Election Watch: Party Nominations

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?