In Summary
  • The current dispute is about how many Kenyans actually voted in the repeat elections.
  • One explanation offered by the commissioners for the possible discrepancy between the EVID's number of voters and the final tally is that we have a complementary system of identification.
  • We must remember that sections of politicians are already toying around with the idea of doing away with project Kenya.

The recent flip-flopping by IEBC on the number of people who voted in the repeat elections left a lot to be desired.  How could such a simple question, with a simple answer, be left to speculation?

Kenya seems to be the only country in the world where if someone asked you a simple question like 'When did President Obama visit the country?', you would get different answers depending on whom you asked. That is how deep our divisions have become.

Our political divisions have scaled up to levels where there shouldn’t be any dispute about these numbers.  This brings a famous quote to the fore the famous quote – we are entitled to our own opinions but not to our own facts.

The current dispute is about how many Kenyans actually voted in the repeat elections. A simple question that has seen the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) flip-flop around it based on which commissioner is answering the question.

Politicians and citizens on both side of the divide quickly picked up the cue and are brandishing their figures left right and centre.

Depending on whom you ask, you get all manner of statistics, from absolute figures of 3million, 6million and 8million to percentage figures of 20 per cent, 30 per cent, 48 per cent to 54 per cent, as representing voter turn out.


We are at a point where it does not matter what IEBC eventually announces as the final voter turnout, very few will believe them because they themselves have helped cannibalise their remaining balance of public trust.

The worst moment occurred when Prof. Guliye, one of the commissioners tried to explain why his Chairman’s figures were flip-flopping. He was quoted saying the EVID (Electronic Voter Identification) Kit was not a reliable source of data as far as voter turnout was concerned.

Quite shocking because last time I checked, the EVID Kit did three things and did them fairly well in the last elections.

First, to identify voters through their fingerprints, second, to transmit the results and third, to actually keep a continuous running tally of people who had voted. That is how the EVID software was designed .

Therefore, it was able to cross-check voter turnout at a polling station and subsequently block a transmission of results that may otherwise have exceeded the number of people who voted. This functionality is at the heart of digitising our electoral process.

Indeed, without this functionality to identify and count voters electronically, we should, as Kenyans, have demanded an immediate an refund of our more than Sh4billion from our French partners for supplying us with toys in the name of EVID kits.

Page 1 of 2