By Anyang’ Nyong’o
The Constitution gives the vote to all Kenyans, including those living outside the country, usually referred to as the Diaspora. Many countries do so, especially the most recent experience in South Sudan.
The Republic of South Sudan is the youngest member of the African Union; hardly a year old. Travelling in South Sudan one will be shocked at the lack of infrastructure and connectivity within the country. Hence holding a national election in its vast territory that can swallow Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania can be a daunting task.
Yet it has been able to hold a national general election and a referendum, which determined its separation from the North, what is now called Sudan. The national referendum was particularly interesting because it is when the Diaspora voted in massive numbers.
At the end of the vote, the winners celebrated their victory while the losers accepted the results as legitimate. If this had not happened, South Sudan would now be engaged in an internal conflict that would undermine the peace and stability it requires for the fight against poverty and rapid socio-economic progress.
But how did the Diaspora vote?
Rather than use Sudanese embassies abroad or the SPLM Liaison Offices, the South Sudan Government outsourced the managing of the elections to the International Organisation for Migration (IOM).
This made it possible to shield embassy officials from being identified with any side in the election. Had the embassies been the venue for voting, claims of rigging and partisanship, true or imagined, could have undermined the legitimacy of the electoral process abroad.
If South Sudan could manage the Diaspora voting process so successfully, why can’t the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) borrow a leaf from the country and do the same for our people?
The answer to this question is important because any attempt to involve our embassies and high commissions abroad will be a recipe for disaster. How about in countries where Kenya has no diplomatic representation?
Do we simply deny Kenyans in such places their constitutional rights simply because we cannot make practical arrangements for them to vote?
There are, however, certain preliminary activities that need to be undertaken in preparing the voters’ registers abroad. Since we live in a world where the information highway is very advanced, this should not be at all difficult.
First, on the IEBC website, there should be a form for all in the diaspora to fill providing the Commission with all the data needed in registering a voter. This data should enable the Commission to know who is who and where in the Diaspora, and what kind of election materials should be sent to which country, town or city to facilitate elections in that particular place.
For example, if in the city of Ottawa in Canada there are 5,000 Kenyans, the Commission should know from which county, constituency and ward these Kenyans are from.
If the data shows all the Kenyans in Ottawa qualify for registration as voters in Nairobi, there would be no need preparing any voting materials for them to vote in Embu – or any other place for that matter – well ahead of the elections.
Secondly, the embassies and missions should simply be transmission belts for information and voter education. They could also facilitate registration by providing space and Internet services for Kenyans seeking information and wanting to register.
Indeed, these missions should already have officers attached to the IEBC working on preparing for elections.
The current practice where the Commission is trying to visit the diaspora to talk about elections and answer questions is only good in so far as it raises the profile of the process; it is no substitute for a proper and institutionalised management of the process at the missions.
For example, IEBC officials have been known to imply that the Diaspora may only vote for the President in the first elections. The constitutionality of this proposal should be carefully examined. If implemented, it could easily lead to problems that could have been avoided by careful preparation in managing the elections.
Thirdly, once the process of voting is outsourced to a body like the IOM, the commission should have a process of instant electronic recording and transmitting the votes cast to the commission itself. This is no rocket science; our ICT Board and various private sector players can begin working with the commission early enough to ensure the success of this proposal.
In the final analysis, IEBC needs to realise that it holds the future of Kenya in its hands. It should by now have indicated to the Government where all the pitfalls are in carrying out free, fair, democratic and legitimate elections.
Hence the present discussion on how much it is going to cost to undertake the elections successfully should not be looked at in terms of how huge the money required is; it should be looked at in terms of whether this money required is going to finance the elections adequately and successfully given the job at hand and the deliverables expected.
In this regard, we had better pay credence to the old English adage that it “is not good to be penny wise and pounds foolish”! That, however, does not mean that anything should go as far as financing the elections are concerned.
We all know that this coming elections may involve a run-off in the presidential elections. Senegal and France recently had run-offs in their respective presidential elections. The commission should be able to get data from the two countries regarding costs and develop a scenario suitable for Kenya given our specific conditions.
The writer is Minister for Medical Services and ODM Secretary General
