In the fourth and final instalment of this four-part investigation into the challenges confronting Kenya’s electoral commission, we examine how internal communication breakdowns, a vacant communications leadership position, strained relations with Parliament, accusations of selective enforcement of electoral rules and mounting political attacks are testing IEBC’s ability to win public confidence. With barely ten months to the August 10, 2027 General Election, can the commission repair its public image and convince Kenyans that it is ready to deliver a credible poll?
The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) is facing another critical test as it prepares for the August 10, 2027 General Election: Its ability to communicate effectively, manage its public image and restore confidence in an institution increasingly under scrutiny.
Yet, even as the commission faces mounting questions about its readiness, its ability to explain decisions, respond to criticism, engage stakeholders and counter misinformation remains a significant weakness.
Allegations of internal communication breakdowns, disagreements over the management of tenders and contracts, and strained relations between commissioners and members of staff are raising fresh questions about the institution’s ability to manage the growing pressure.
The situation has been compounded by the departure of the commission’s Corporate Communication and Public Affairs Manager, Purity Njeru, who resigned last month amid claims of poor working relations between the secretariat and commissioners. The position remains vacant, leaving IEBC without a substantive head of corporate communications at a particularly sensitive stage of election preparations.
This is more than an ordinary staffing gap. With the election approaching, the commission needs a clear communication strategy, an effective media engagement structure and someone responsible for coordinating its public messaging. Without substantive leadership in this critical function, questions arise over who is providing strategic direction, managing emerging communication crises and ensuring that the commission speaks with clarity and consistency.
The consequences are already becoming apparent. At a time when allegations about voter registration, electoral manipulation and the enforcement of electoral rules are circulating, IEBC cannot afford to appear reactive, inaccessible or uncertain in its communication.
An electoral commission does not build public confidence merely by insisting that it is independent or prepared. It must demonstrate those qualities through timely disclosures, clear explanations, accessible officials and consistent engagement with the public.
The communication challenges have also spilled into the commission’s relationship with Parliament, where MPs have repeatedly questioned its budget requests, campaign finance regulations and preparedness for the 2027 elections.
At one point, the commission found itself at odds with parliamentary leadership after MPs accused it of running a “one-man show” and sidelining them in the development and public participation process for campaign finance regulations.
During a meeting with parliamentary leadership in Mombasa, a senior parliamentary leader reportedly took the commissioners to task over their conduct, reminding them that they were not indispensable and that their predecessors had also assumed office only eight months before the 2022 General Election.
The episode exposed a deeper problem: The importance of consultation and stakeholder engagement in managing an institution whose decisions have far-reaching political and constitutional implications.
The strained relationship has also played out in budget discussions.
Earlier this year, MPs rejected IEBC’s request for Ksh63 billion to conduct the 2027 elections, arguing that the Ksh43 billion allocated by the National Treasury was sufficient. Some legislators described the additional funding request as wasteful.
Stakeholders have argued that better consultation and communication by the commission could have helped avert the standoff by allowing Parliament to understand the basis of its financial requirements.
While Parliament has a responsibility to scrutinise public expenditure, IEBC also has an obligation to explain its operational requirements convincingly. A detailed and well-communicated justification of its budget needs is essential, particularly when the commission is preparing to conduct a national election involving complex logistical, technological and security demands.
The broader lesson is that communication cannot be treated as an afterthought or a public relations exercise. It is central to securing the institutional cooperation and resources necessary for a credible election.
Beyond its relationship with Parliament, IEBC is also facing growing questions about its independence and ability to enforce electoral rules, particularly amid public statements by government-aligned politicians that critics say threaten the integrity of the electoral process.
Among the controversial remarks are claims about dead voters ‘participating’ in elections, suggestions of kujaza kura (vote stuffing), and allegations that foreigners are being registered as voters.
Such statements have heightened public anxiety about the integrity of the voter register and the commission’s ability to protect the electoral process from manipulation.
They also place a greater responsibility on IEBC to communicate clearly, investigate credible allegations and provide verifiable information capable of either confirming or dispelling public concerns.
The commission has also faced criticism over what some stakeholders consider weak enforcement of the Electoral Code of Conduct, with accusations that it has turned a blind eye and, consequently, a mute tongue to political activities and inappropriate public statements that fall within its regulatory mandate.
IEBC has, in some instances, defended its handling of such matters, arguing that certain remarks were made outside the electoral period during which the Code of Conduct is enforceable. It has also pointed to action taken against individuals accused of breaching electoral rules, including the summoning of United Democratic Alliance (UDA) Secretary-General Hassan Omar before the Code of Conduct Enforcement Committee.
In mid-October, IEBC Chairperson Erastus Ethekon urged political leaders and other participants to exercise restraint as the country prepares for the polls.
“With the 2027 General Election approaching, the Commission urges political leaders, candidates, supporters and all other participants to exercise restraint and responsibility in their public utterances and conduct. It calls on them to help build an electoral environment founded on peace, tolerance, respect for the rule of law and democratic participation,” Ethekon said.
What is needed, however, is not simply another statement urging restraint. It is visible, consistent and impartial enforcement of the rules. The commission must demonstrate that its warnings carry consequences, regardless of the political influence of those involved.
The commission’s handling of political violence has also come under scrutiny.
In July, IEBC threatened to cancel the Ol Kalou constituency by-election following reports of violence, voter bribery, intimidation and disruptions. The incidents occurred amid an intense campaign by UDA to secure the seat.
The threat to cancel the poll was viewed by critics as a reactive response, with some questioning why the commission had not acted more decisively against alleged violations of electoral rules before the situation escalated.
The incident renewed debate over IEBC’s ability to enforce the Electoral Code of Conduct consistently, particularly where political actors accused of violations are influential.
Seeking a more proactive approach
As criticism of its communication and enforcement record mounts, IEBC has increasingly called for collaboration with other institutions to safeguard the credibility of the 2027 elections.
On October 13, 2026, officials from the State Department for Broadcasting and Telecommunication, the Media Council of Kenya (MCK), the Communications Authority (CA) and IEBC held a consultative meeting at Anniversary Towers to discuss ways of strengthening cooperation ahead of the polls.
The meeting focused on practical measures to improve information sharing, media engagement and coordination among institutions involved in safeguarding the electoral process.
Principal Secretary for Broadcasting and Telecommunication Stephen Isaboke emphasised the need for institutions to work together and anticipate potential challenges rather than wait for a crisis to emerge.
“One of the things I emphasise is collaboration. We must keep peace and keep order. We want to be proactive before a crisis,” Isaboke said.
MCK Chief Executive Officer David Omwoyo said the electoral commission and other public institutions needed to establish constructive working relationships with the media well before the election period.
“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 peacetime is a good thing,” Omwoyo noted.
He urged IEBC to strengthen its engagement with journalists by ensuring that its officials are accessible to clarify emerging issues, regularly communicating the commission’s activities and responding promptly to disputes and concerns raised by the media.
Omwoyo also warned against withholding information from the public, saying communication gaps could create opportunities for speculation and misinformation.
“If we withhold credible information, the void will quickly be filled by the very narratives we seek to prevent,” he stated.
His warning speaks directly to one of IEBC’s most pressing challenges. In an increasingly contested political environment, silence is rarely neutral. When the commission fails to provide timely and credible information, other actors fill the gap, sometimes with speculation, partisan interpretations and allegations that become difficult to contain.
The commission must therefore move away from a largely reactive approach to public communication and establish a consistent flow of information that anticipates public concerns rather than responding only after controversies have escalated.
This means regular media briefings, accessible technical officers, timely publication of important decisions, clear explanations of procurement and electoral processes, and a credible mechanism for addressing misinformation. It also requires the appointment of substantive communication leadership capable of coordinating these responsibilities and ensuring that the commission’s messaging is coherent across its various departments.
Political pressure and questions over preparedness
The commission’s communication challenges have also been compounded by criticism from opposition politicians over its handling of election preparations.
On October 4, 2026, former Attorney General Justin Muturi, speaking on behalf of the United Alternative Government, questioned foreign travel by senior IEBC officials at a time when the commission was facing several court cases and procurement challenges ahead of the 2027 elections.
Muturi argued that the commission should take responsibility for delays in its preparations rather than attribute its challenges entirely to ongoing court proceedings.
He questioned why senior officials, including the Acting Chief Executive Officer and Head of Procurement, were reportedly outside the country when critical procurement decisions and other preparations required their attention.
“The Commission cannot, on the one hand, plead with the courts to speed up cases, and on the other hand, freeze its own processes for foreign travel,” the Democratic Party leader said.
The remarks added to the scrutiny of the commission’s management and operational readiness, particularly following concerns over leadership vacancies and the procurement disputes examined in the earlier instalments of this investigation.
While political criticism should not automatically be taken as evidence of institutional failure, it places an additional responsibility on IEBC to provide clear and timely explanations of its decisions, activities and progress.
The commission cannot expect the public to distinguish between legitimate institutional explanations and political attacks if it does not communicate its own position effectively and consistently.
Voter registration claims put IEBC on the defensive
The commission has also been forced to respond to allegations that foreigners are being registered as voters, following a KTN investigation and claims by Trans Nzoia Governor that Ugandans were being transported across the border to enlist as voters.
The allegations raised questions about the integrity of the voter register and the commission’s ability to prevent ineligible persons from participating in the electoral process.
On October 27, 2026, IEBC issued a statement urging the public and other stakeholders to distinguish between verifiable evidence and unsubstantiated claims, warning against the spread of misinformation that could undermine confidence in the electoral process.
“The Commission urges the public and all stakeholders to distinguish between credible evidence and unverified allegations, misinformation or sensationalist claims. The Commission shall continue to provide factual information on its processes and shall not be diverted from its constitutional mandate by unfounded assertions intended to undermine public confidence in the electoral process,” Ethekon said.
The commission’s response highlights the difficult balance it must strike between defending its institutional credibility and providing sufficient information to address legitimate public concerns.
While unsubstantiated allegations can undermine confidence in an electoral institution, dismissing concerns without providing verifiable information can also deepen public suspicion.
Where allegations concern the integrity of the voter register, for instance, a general denial may not be enough. The public needs to understand the safeguards in place, how registration information is verified, how suspected irregularities are investigated and what action is taken when evidence of wrongdoing emerges.
For IEBC, the challenge is therefore not simply to issue statements denying allegations, but to demonstrate through transparent processes, accessible information and credible evidence that its systems are working as required by law.
This is where strategic communication becomes inseparable from institutional accountability. The commission must be prepared to explain what it is doing, why it is doing it, what the law requires and what steps it is taking when problems arise.
It must also recognise that communicating effectively does not mean responding to every political accusation with a press statement. It means distinguishing between misinformation, legitimate criticism and issues requiring investigation, then responding appropriately and consistently.
Editor’s Note
The four instalments of this investigation have examined different but interconnected challenges confronting IEBC ahead of the 2027 General Election: Internal management and leadership instability, procurement disputes, constitutional and operational questions, and now the communication crisis threatening to deepen the commission’s trust deficit.
Taken together, these challenges point to a wider institutional problem. The commission is not only being judged on whether it can organise an election, but also on whether it can demonstrate that it is independent, transparent, accountable and capable of managing the political and public pressure that comes with the electoral process.
With the 2027 elections approaching, IEBC must demonstrate that it can maintain constructive relationships with Parliament, the media, political parties, security agencies and other institutions whose cooperation is essential to the delivery of a credible poll.
It must also address the communication vacuum within its own ranks, beginning with the appointment of substantive leadership in the corporate communications function. An institution preparing for one of the most consequential elections in the country’s recent history cannot afford to leave such a critical function without a substantive head.
The growing calls for collaboration, particularly from the media and other public agencies, suggest that the commission’s communication strategy will be as important as its technical preparations in shaping public confidence.
But collaboration must go beyond consultative meetings and public declarations of goodwill. It must translate into regular engagement, openness, responsiveness and a willingness to account for decisions.
Ultimately, IEBC cannot communicate its way out of institutional weaknesses. Nor can it restore public confidence through carefully worded statements alone. Its communication must be backed by credible action, transparent decision-making, consistent enforcement of electoral laws and demonstrable progress in its preparations.
The Constitution requires elections to be transparent and administered impartially, neutrally, efficiently, accurately and accountably. These requirements place a responsibility on IEBC not only to conduct the polls properly but also to demonstrate that its decisions and processes can withstand public scrutiny.
As this four-part investigation has established, the challenges confronting the commission are interconnected. Internal instability can undermine operational efficiency; procurement disputes can delay critical preparations; weaknesses in enforcement can raise questions about independence; and poor communication can deepen public suspicion about all three.
The commission’s communication difficulties therefore have implications far beyond its public image. Where information is withheld, concerns are left unanswered or allegations are addressed only after they have escalated, public confidence can suffer. Equally, the commission must demonstrate that it can enforce electoral rules consistently, irrespective of the political standing of those accused of violating them.
As the August 10, 2027 General Election approaches, IEBC faces the urgent task of restoring confidence in its independence, stabilising its institutional operations, improving engagement with stakeholders and demonstrating that it is prepared to manage the political, administrative and technical demands of the polls.
The ultimate test will be whether it can move beyond issuing assurances and demonstrate, through its actions, that it is capable of delivering an election whose integrity Kenyans can trust.
That is the burden of public trust, and it is one IEBC cannot afford to fail.