Problem is not IEBC, it is the system

Youths demonstrate in Kisumu over Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission commissioners' reluctance to resign on May 9, 2016. Kenyans have been invited to give views on the fate of the electoral body on July 25 and 26 in Nairobi. PHOTO | TOM OTIENO | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • We all want a peaceful election next year without tackling the main cause of non-peace.
  • We pray for politicians that they may keep peace and ensure our beloved country remains united after the electioneering period.
  • The one person, one vote principle remains the biggest threat to peace and the cause of electoral violence in Kenya.

The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission should not be thrown out because it allegedly, as street talk has it, bungled the 2013 General Election. Nor should we disband it because some commissioners “ate chicken”. The reason IEBC ought to go is its inability to throw out the one person, one vote principle.

It is interesting how we all want a peaceful election next year without tackling the main cause of non-peace. From the donor world, the friends of Kenya, the opposition, the government, and ordinary Kenyans, we are all praying hard that Kenya does not burn again next year.

Our friends from the international community are committed to funding many elements of the electoral process, including civic and voter education. The IEBC receives grants from the international community to conduct not just a fair and free election but equally important, a peaceful one.

Locally, the big budgets allocated to the security docket indicate that the State is intent to not only keep terrorists at bay but also to maintain internal harmony despite claims of planned election rigging. We expect more military preparedness just in case violence erupts. That costs money.

We pray for politicians that they may keep peace and ensure our beloved country remains united after the electioneering period.

Candidates are as well not submitting themselves to State protection or the mercy of God. As in the past, they are secretly militarising a few youths around them in the event they are to deal with violence.

All these energies are wonderful but largely misplaced.

Regardless of our current attempts to ensure that peace prevails, the one person, one vote principle remains the biggest threat to peace and the cause of electoral violence in this country.

POLITICIANS TRADE TRIBES

The problem with this principle lies in the way it is easily used to rally tribes around “one of our own”. If “one of our own” is not in the race, our transactional political system ensures that “one of our own” makes the best bargain for us. Effectively, politicians trade tribes.

There is a second reason this one person, one vote principle is dangerous. There are many people who enjoy their right to vote but who do not understand the weight of that right.

Some drunken, ill-informed fanatical follower of a candidate or some person who is not fully in charge of their faculties will walk into a booth and vote. Some cantankerous voters will exercise their right to vote simply because they received “transport refund”.

These kinds of voters do not deserve to enjoy this right. They simply swell the numbers for crafty and well-rehearsed candidates.

Anyway, let them enjoy their right through universal suffrage. What we need to consider is an alternative system to compliment the one person, one vote principle. The US runs a popular vote (the one person, one vote principle) but supplements it with the delegates vote.

In Italy, Australia, and Israel the parliamentary system is used to elect the leader of government. These alternative complimentary mechanisms ensure that voters do not use cultural identity as the main electioneering tag.

I propose that we consider a two-pronged popular vote approach for the governorship and the presidency. First, people should vote for the candidate in the universal suffrage. Second, they should vote for the party.

A voter casts his ballot by choosing either the vote-candidate or vote-party options. Each outcome is weighted at 50 per cent. A candidate will have to garner 25 per cent in least in 24 counties — as is stated in the Constitution using the vote-candidate option.

For the vote-party candidate, in addition to the vote-candidate condition, he/she must garner at least 5 per cent of the vote-party ballots cast in 24 counties.

To vote through the vote-party option, people tick three out of five qualities their preferred candidate is assessed on. The qualities may include performance track record, integrity, strength of party, articulation of vision, and foreign policy.

This approach, if well refined, would kill ethnic hatred, ensure a peaceful electoral process, and promote democratic vibrancy without disadvantaging either the voters or the candidates.

Dr Nyatete is the executive director of the Jesuit Hakimani Centre.