Kenyan voter goes to court to block new electoral laws

A voter has gone to court to challenge the new electoral law that edged out poll commissioners.

Through lawyer Paul Nyamodi, Collins Kipchumba Tallam argued that the Election Laws (Amendment) Act 2016 had various inconsistencies that not only infringed on the rights of voters but also the independence of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).

Among the provisions in the Act he wants the court to declare unconstitutional are those requiring biometric identification of voters, transmission of presidential elections results through electronic means and denying IEBC the opportunity to resolve disputes arising from party nominations.

The petitioner is also contesting the provision for independent audit of the IEBC voters' register, claiming that it will subject the commission to undue influence and pressure.

Mr Tallam said Section 10 of the Act, which provides that only voters whose names and biometric data appear in the voter register will be allowed to vote, interfered with the people's rights to democratically elect their leaders.

"It is against the requirement that the conduct of elections should be designed to facilitate and not deny any person the right to participate in an election," he argued.

He said the section was unfair because it did not take into consideration the fact that some voters could lose their fingers before the elections.

On Section 39, which provides for electronic transmission of presidential election results, Tallam argued that the law failed to appreciate the possibility of system failures.

He claimed the provision allowing a third party not operated by IEBC to transmit the results would compromise the credibility of the results.

"The exclusive reliance on a telecommunication network operated by a third party takes away the responsibility placed on IEBC, since the commission will not be able to guarantee the integrity of presidential results," he said.

The lawyer claimed that if this section was not removed from the Act, then the commission should not be held accountable for any outcome.

The petitioner is also contesting some sections of the Act that require both political party primaries and the commission's nominations to happen the same day to avoid party hopping, saying this would make it impossible for IEBC to hear and determine any disputes arising from party nominations.

He argued that allowing an independent audit firm to audit the voter register interfered with IEBC's constitutional mandate.