NAIROBI, Kenya – Kenyans could lose the legal guarantee of watching polling-station election results announced live if Parliament approves a proposed amendment to the Elections Act, opening a fresh debate over how voters will scrutinise the 2027 General Election.
The Elections (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2024, seeks to remove the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission’s (IEBC) express obligation to establish a mechanism for livestreaming results as they are announced at polling stations.
The Bill has already passed the Senate and advanced through the National Assembly’s legislative process, but it still requires the necessary parliamentary approval before becoming law.
The proposed change would not abolish electronic transmission of presidential results or the requirement to publish polling-station result forms online. Instead, it would remove a separate safeguard that enables citizens, journalists and election observers to follow announcements as they happen.
That distinction is central to the debate: having access to a signed results form after an announcement is not the same as being able to watch the announcement in real time.
What the Bill Would Change
Under the proposed amendments, results declared at polling stations would remain final, while the IEBC would retain responsibility for verifying transmitted figures against results recorded at the respective polling stations.
The proposal also retains electronic transmission of presidential results within two hours of their declaration, alongside provisions for publishing polling-station results forms on a public portal.
These measures would preserve important parts of the election results process. However, the commission would no longer have an explicit statutory duty to livestream the announcements.
Television stations, journalists and election observers could still report or record results independently, but the public would lose the assurance that the IEBC itself must provide a live feed.
This could make it harder for voters to compare figures as they are announced with the forms subsequently uploaded online, particularly when results are coming in from thousands of polling stations across the country.
Why the Livestreaming Provision Became Controversial
The debate has its roots in amendments introduced to the Elections Act after the disputed 2017 presidential election.
Those changes required the IEBC to livestream results but also stated that streamed figures were for public information only and could not form the basis for declaring a winner.
In April 2018, the High Court declared several provisions of the amendments unconstitutional in a case brought by Katiba Institute and other petitioners. The court found that restricting the legal significance of livestreamed results undermined transparency and weakened the electoral process.
The proposed Bill would remove the livestreaming obligation rather than simply retaining the public feed while deleting the wording that was struck down by the court.
That has raised a question for lawmakers: should correcting the legal framework also mean removing the requirement for the commission to broadcast results announcements?
IEBC’s Position on Results Verification
The IEBC has argued that the official record of a presidential vote at a polling station is the statutory results declaration form, commonly known as Form 34A, rather than a figure displayed on a live broadcast.
The commission has also maintained that the proposed framework would preserve transparency through the publication of results forms and verification of electronically transmitted figures. In a separate statement on election-law amendments, it said stakeholders would be able to access the portal containing the results records.
The commission has also clarified that it did not draft or sponsor the separate 2026 Election Laws (Amendment) Bill, which has generated related debate over election technology. The two legislative proposals should not be confused.
The distinction matters because the legal requirement to livestream results is separate from the electronic transmission of results and the publication of signed forms.
Why Critics Want the Live Feed Retained
Supporters of mandatory livestreaming argue that public access to results as they are announced helps independent observers detect discrepancies early and builds confidence in the tallying process.
In remarks reported by The Standard, Principal Secretary for Foreign Affairs Korir Sing’oei highlighted livestreaming as a means of strengthening public trust in elections. The proposal has also drawn concern from critics who say removing the obligation could weaken real-time scrutiny ahead of the 2027 polls.
A public results portal remains useful, but it serves a different purpose. It allows people to examine documents once they are available; a live feed enables them to watch the announcement itself and begin comparing figures as the count progresses.
The practical concern is therefore not simply whether results will eventually be published, but how quickly the public will be able to access and scrutinise them.
The Decision Facing Parliament
Parliament can consider whether the proposed legal changes should remove the livestreaming obligation altogether or retain the requirement while addressing the provisions previously invalidated by the courts.
A clear distinction between provisional figures and officially verified results could also help reduce confusion without eliminating live public access.
The Constitution requires elections to meet principles of transparency and accountability. As the Bill progresses through Parliament, lawmakers will have to weigh the commission’s reliance on signed forms and verification against the public value of watching results announcements as they happen.
The outcome could shape how Kenyans follow the next general election—not by changing how votes are cast, but by changing how much of the results announcement process they are guaranteed to see.
