Do a quick Internet search on news about IEBC and the chances are that most of the headlines would be outright negative or at least about controversies around the electoral body.
“IEBC in big crisis as Kiems tender suspended yet again”. “IEBC sued over changes to 2027 ballot papers.” “2027 election: Why IEBC’s readiness is under scrutiny.” “IEBC suffers series of setbacks in Parliament”.
As an award-winning Nairobi journalist would write, all eyes are on the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission as the country hurtles towards the 2027 General Election.
This is only natural. Concern about the competency, capacity, independence, neutrality and readiness of the referee for the nation’s most important democratic process is a legitimate and undebatable matter of public interest.
And then there is the history. Kenya’s elections have always been marred by an avalanche of complaints about the electoral body. Both the Kriegler and Waki commissions cited major weaknesses in election management as an immediate cause of Kenya’s worst ever election crisis in 2007.
Even after Kenya became a multiparty democracy in 1991, elections were still conducted by the government. Under pressure for electoral reforms, President Daniel arap Moi formed the Inter-Parties Parliamentary Group (IPPG) in 1997.
“It created the Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK) that oversaw subsequent elections,” former Vice President Moody Awori writes in his memoirs, ‘Riding on a Tiger’. “Thanks to it, for the first time, the provincial administration was not supervising elections. That was a huge step forward for democracy in Kenya.”
Those reforms culminated, 13 years later, in the establishment of the current IEBC as an independent body under the Constitution of Kenya 2010.
But election management weaknesses persist. The Supreme Court, in an unprecedented and globally rare decision, overturned the presidential election results announced by IEBC in 2017 and ordered a fresh poll.
Given this chequered election history, the IEBC must always consciously strive to be like Caesar’s wife: above suspicion. One of the strategic measures for building public confidence is effective image management and communication.
On October 13, IEBC held a high-level consultative meeting with officials from the State Department for Broadcasting and Telecommunication, Media Council of Kenya (MCK), and Communications Authority (CA) on the upcoming election.
The MCK CEO David Omwoyo said the council and the electoral agency should invest in media relations early and not wait until they are dealing with a crisis.
“We have a very delicate thing to do called media relations. We need to establish a working relationship with the media when we are not dealing with a crisis. A continuous working relationship with the media during peace time is a good thing,” he said.
He urged the IEBC to strengthen its media engagement by ensuring it is readily available to clarify emerging issues, proactively communicating the IEBC’s work to encourage accurate and constructive reporting, and addressing disputes promptly while maintaining regular contact with media houses.
Omwoyo advised the commission to proactively share information with the public, warning that withholding good information leaves room for speculation and disinformation.
“If we withhold credible information, the void will quickly be filled by the very narratives we seek to prevent,” he stated.
Underlying Omwoyo’s observations is the reality that the IEBC’s public communications and media relations is sometimes not up to scratch. Few Kenyans will ever directly interact with IEBC outside electoral processes. What the public mostly knows comes from media reports.
There are instances where Anniversary Towers has remained silent as controversies swirled around it. Newsrooms have sometimes been left to report that the IEBC was not available for a comment.
In the public imagination, when an institution as big and as critical to democracy as the IEBC is unavailable for a comment, then it is presumed to be guilty as alleged. Calling a press conference days later or issuing a statement to deny damning accusations and make clarifications is often too little too late.
Once a news story has been published and reproduced by countless platforms within a hours, delayed clarifications may not reach everyone who got the initial report.
Or even among those who come across the clarification, the first impression that was created would have already stuck and they may be unwilling to give the IEBC a fair hearing.
The IEBC ought, therefore, to undertake continuous media monitoring and proactive public communication. Every telephone call or email from a journalist should be answered promptly.
But the electoral commission has also been a victim of unfair news reporting. One can cite stories in which there is no evidence of attempts to get the IEBC’s response.
While the media is duty-bound to uphold the law and professional ethics, the IEBC must understand the critical role of public communication in effectively discharging its mandate.
See you next week!
