Kenya’s Democratic Challenge

October 26^th 2017 saw the Kenyan people lining up once again at polling stations to cast their vote for the second time in less than three months. The August 8^th elections saw current president, Uhuru Kenyatta face off against longtime rival and opposition leader Raila Odinga, in a highly anticipated and contested election. The election was seen both locally and internationally as a test to Kenya’s democratic and political maturity, to see if they were prepared and able to hold a fair and credible election. Unfortunately they failed this test. While international observers, were quick (maybe too quick) to praise the process as “free, fair and credible”, in actuality the August 8^th elections were fraught with irregularities and discrepancies. Kenya’s electoral history is by no means faultless as the country has only managed to hold one election (2002) that has not faced validity challenges. The post-election violence in 2007 provides a constant reminder of the deadly consequences of circumventing democratic values to stay in Power.

Despite this, it is wrong to see this marred history as representative of the Kenyan people, as they have shown time and again their willingness and enthusiasm to exercise their right to vote. The August 9^th election was no different. Voter turnout was impressive with almost 80% of eligible Kenyans showing up to place their ballot. Despite long days standing in queues, Kenyans endured, with the atmosphere at many of the polling stations reflecting their excitement, hope and pride in being able to exercise their civic duty. Voting therefore is not the problem, as Kenyans have shown to be willing participants. It is counting the votes and finalizing the results that has proven to be problematic in almost all previous elections. Once again, the August 9^th election was no different.

Tasked with conducting and supervising the election was the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) a newly formed regulatory bodied mandated by the countries 2010 constitution. The IEBCs credibility took a massive hit when, just a week before the elections, Chris Msando, head of the commissions information technology, was found tortured and murdered. As the votes began coming in, Kenyatta was comfortably ahead, which prompted accusations of vote-rigging and data breaches by Odinga and the opposition. These suspicions, coupled with the murder of Msando, encouraged the opposition to seek redress through legal channels and in an unexpected turn of events the results that saw Kenyatta win the election were subsequently annulled by Kenya’s Supreme Court.

The court ultimately found that the election was riddled with irregularities and that the IEBC “failed, neglected, or refused to conduct the presidential election in a manner consistent with the dictates of the Constitution. This decision was a shock to many. Not only did it highlight a maturity within the judiciary that may have been at odds with common perceptions, it also showed a major step by the courts to establish their independence and legitimacy. Notwithstanding this, the Supreme Court’s ruling to nullify the results of presidential election was the first of its kind in Africa and only the fourth worldwide. The court subsequently ordered a re-election which was to be held at a later date.

While the opposition were clearly optimistic about the ruling, the mood soon turned sour as the presidential race between the two sides grew increasingly heated. This was exacerbated by Odingas decision to withdraw from the race altogether. The opposition claimed that the IEBC was unwilling to make the necessary changes needed to ensure a free and credible re-election and as such they called for a nationwide boycott by their supporters on Election Day. So that brings us to present day. The re-election has understandably failed to illicit the same excitement and hope the initial election did. This has been reflected in a low voter turnout (around 35%) and the empty polling stations scattered around the country. Determining the legitimacy of the re-election is difficult as the whole process has been shrouded with uncertainty. There is no praxis to lean on, which leaves experts to grapple with how best to interpret the constitution. Ultimately, the country’s highest court will once again be tasked with ruling on the outcome.

Kenyans have been left in a familiar predicament. Those who have placed their trust in their leaders have once again been left disappointed and hoping for peace in a state where country-wide divides have been fueled by the same leaders who have promised unity. Kenya’s political system has once again failed the people it is meant to empower. This unfortunate predicament may leave many Kenyans with a deep seated suspicion of the countries electoral process which begs the question of whether any future elections can be trusted to be “free, fair and credible”. The political elite in Kenya have been sowing an illusion of legitimacy and credibility that will continue to be eroded as long as issues like fraud and corruption endure.

A silver lining of the August 8^th elections was the emergence of independent candidates, maybe not at the presidential level but at county and parliamentary levels. Several new candidates were able to secure political seats, often beating more established and better funded names. These successes have ignited a spark of hope that a political transformation, led by a new generation, may be plausible. But without the political legacies and resources or means to compete, these groups and individuals will find it difficult to challenge the dynastic rivalry that has dominated Kenyan politics for years. Nevertheless, by providing an alternative and reaching out to an increasingly young and tech-savvy electorate, these candidates could help alter the dominant political mold that has taken hold in the country. This change will not happen overnight, but as long as young candidates continue to forge their own path by refusing to conform traditional methods, changes may occur higher up the political spectrum.

What the future holds is difficult to determine. Voter fatigue and a complete loss of faith in the electoral process may render any further attempts at re-election pointless. At the end of the day, the country still needs a leader and the lure of stability and return to status quo may be too tempting to pass up. Guaranteeing peace may be more important than who ends up winning the election. Many Kenyans will be forced to hide their resentments and frustrations, until of course the next election, where the political elite will once again stoke these emotions with empty promises, in an attempt to garner votes. In a country with a population yearning for democracy to take hold, political intimidation, fraud and repression risks subverting hard fought for democratic advancements. One thing is clear though: the voters have done their part, it is time for the politicians to do theirs.