NAIROBI, Kenya – A standoff between the National Assembly and the Senate has stalled a key Bill aimed at tightening accountability within the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), exposing deep divisions over how far the law should go in punishing electoral malpractice.
The Elections Offences (Amendment) Bill, 2024 — a product of the National Dialogue Committee (NADCO) process — seeks to penalise election officials who conduct polls in unauthorised areas, manipulate results, or delay declarations.
But it has failed to move forward after both Houses rejected each other’s amendments.
At the centre of the impasse is whether officers should face criminal sanctions for holding elections in polling stations that are not officially gazetted.
The original Bill proposed fines or jail terms for such actions, arguing it would curb unauthorised voting centres used to distort results.
Senators pushed back, saying the offence was unnecessary because existing laws already cover illegal polling stations.
Instead, they introduced a broader offence criminalising any deliberate interference with, destruction of, or concealment of election materials or results — including instructing others to commit such acts.
The National Assembly dismissed the Senate’s approach and reinstated the initial clauses, including the explicit penalty for conducting elections in ungazetted centres and tampering with declared results.
In a report, the Senate Justice and Legal Affairs Committee stood its ground, saying:
“The offence of conducting elections in ungazetted polling stations was unnecessary. The more appropriate focus is on criminalising deliberate acts of interference with, alteration, destruction or concealment of election materials or declared results.”
Another sticking point is how to penalise delays in announcing results. MPs argue that holding officials accountable is critical, citing Article 138(10), which requires presidential results to be declared within seven days, and section 39(1) of the Elections Act, which demands immediate declaration of other results.
Senators objected to the phrase “unreasonable delay” in the original text, saying it was vague and open to conflicting interpretations. They replaced it with specific offences tied to the constitutional timelines.
The Senate committee said it amended the Bill to:
“Delete the phrase and instead restate the offence of failing to declare presidential results within seven days and failing to declare other results immediately after close of polling.”
The Houses also clashed over the criminalisation of digital campaign misconduct. Senators argued for a new offence targeting intimidation or undue influence via electronic communication, citing rising threats of online manipulation and cyber harassment during campaigns.
MPs rejected the proposal, saying current laws already cover intimidation, bribery, and undue influence and that adding digital aspects would be redundant.
Despite being billed as a tool to strengthen electoral integrity, the Bill has instead reopened long-standing disagreements over how to balance stringent safeguards with legal clarity and fairness.
With both chambers digging in, the fate of the Elections Offences (Amendment) Bill now hinges on whether a mediation process can find a compromise.
