The Mt Kenya Times 
With 2027 approaching and old wounds reopened, Kenya faces a narrowing window to rebuild confidence in its electoral system.
By Dennis Wendo
Once again, Kenya is being forced to confront an uncomfortable question: can the country enter another election without first addressing the deep crisis of trust surrounding the management of its polls?
Recent remarks by former President Uhuru Kenyatta and former Cabinet Secretary Moses Kuria have reopened some of the most painful electoral memories. Kenyatta claims Raila Odinga actually won the 2022 presidential election but was denied victory. Kuria, responding to those remarks, went further, making allegations about the 2013 and 2017 elections — including claims about rejected votes, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission’s servers and efforts to influence outcomes.
These are serious allegations. They should not become merely another round of accusations traded through the media. Where individuals claim to possess evidence of electoral manipulation, that evidence must be presented to the appropriate institutions and subjected to independent scrutiny.
But beyond the personalities involved lies a more important national question: why does every disputed presidential election leave behind a larger deficit of public confidence? That is the question Kenya must answer before 2027.
The challenge is not new. Following the 2013 election, the Supreme Court considered, among other matters, the treatment of rejected votes and irregularities in the tallying process. The court upheld the election, but the litigation demonstrated the depth of public concern. Four years later, the country witnessed something even more consequential — the Supreme Court annulled the 2017 presidential election and ordered a fresh poll, citing non-compliance with constitutional and electoral requirements.
These events matter because electoral credibility is cumulative. Every unresolved controversy becomes part of public memory. Every allegation that is not adequately investigated adds another layer of suspicion. By 2027, Kenyans will not approach the ballot box carrying only the experiences of that particular election. They will carry 2013, 2017 and 2022 with them.
This makes the role of the IEBC exceptionally important. The commission’s own Election Operation Plan for 2025–2027 acknowledges as much, committing to an electoral process grounded in integrity, transparency, accountability and public confidence, and pledging that every vote cast will be counted, verified and accurately reflected in the final result.
The difficulty is that institutional commitments alone cannot rebuild trust. Trust has to be demonstrated.
Public debate continues to point to a confidence deficit around the IEBC — concerns about the voter register, election technology, procurement, institutional leadership and the transparency of electoral processes. Parliamentary debate has explicitly acknowledged the problem. This is why preparations for 2027 must go beyond procuring equipment, registering voters and training polling officials. Kenyans need to understand how the system works before they are asked to accept its outcome.
The technology question remains critical. Kenya’s recent electoral history has shown that disputes move rapidly from the physical ballot to electronic transmission, servers, biometric identification and results management. The IEBC is already proposing legal reforms covering election technology and results management. But the answer should not be to ask Kenyans simply to trust the technology. It should be to make that technology independently auditable and transparent enough to withstand scrutiny by political parties, accredited observers, civil society and the courts.
The same principle applies to the voter register. A credible election begins with a credible register. Voters must have adequate opportunities to verify their details, challenge inaccuracies and understand how the register is protected from manipulation.
The commission also needs to communicate more effectively. Silence creates space for speculation. Delayed explanations allow rumours to take root. Technical processes that are poorly explained become political controversies. The IEBC must move from simply announcing what it is doing to explaining how and why.
Political actors carry responsibility too. Candidates and parties should not wait until results are announced to question the credibility of a system they helped shape. If there are genuine concerns about technology, voter registration, tallying or polling procedures, they must be raised early and through established mechanisms. Equally, politicians who make allegations of electoral fraud must be prepared to substantiate them. A credible democracy cannot be built on allegations alone — but neither can it be built by dismissing every allegation as political propaganda. What is needed is evidence, transparency and accountable institutions.
Civil society also has a role that begins well before polling day. Independent organisations should monitor the entire electoral cycle — voter registration, civic education, campaign financing, political violence, technology, inclusion and dispute resolution. The media, likewise, must resist amplifying unverified electoral claims. Its duty is to interrogate allegations, demand evidence and give citizens the information they need to understand what is happening.
The ultimate responsibility, however, rests with electoral institutions and political leadership. There is less than a year before the August 2027 General Election. The window for addressing weaknesses is narrowing. The objective should not simply be an election declared peaceful on polling day. Kenya needs an election whose credibility survives the day after the results are announced.
That begins with a straightforward principle: trust cannot be manufactured after votes are counted. It has to be built before the first ballot is cast.
The remarks by Kenyatta and Kuria should therefore be treated not merely as another confrontation between former allies, but as an opportunity to ask difficult institutional questions. What safeguards exist today that did not exist in 2013? What lessons from 2017 have actually been implemented? What weaknesses exposed in 2022 have been permanently addressed? Can political parties independently verify critical aspects of the electoral system? Can ordinary voters understand how their vote travels from the polling station to the final declaration?
And, most importantly: if the result is contested in 2027, will Kenyans have enough confidence in the system to allow the law and evidence to settle the dispute — rather than street mobilisation and political confrontation?
These questions cannot wait until August 2027. The credibility of the next election is being built now. Kenya does not merely need another election. It needs an election whose outcome citizens can scrutinise, understand and accept through constitutional and democratic processes — regardless of who wins.
The real test of 2027 will not simply be who takes the ballot. It will be whether Kenyans believe it was honestly counted.
Dennis Wendo is a governance and social policy commentator. Email: dambehi@gmail.com
Similar Posts by The Mt Kenya Times:
- Kenya’s first oil moves closer as drilling rig arrives at Mombasa port
- Tharaka Nithi tobacco farmers back proposed control amendments
- Harambee Stars crisis deepens as players protest and work permit questions emerge
- Manchester City found guilty of 114 Premier League charges
- Mané invests $20M in hometown agro project
About the Author
