Review of electoral boundaries has always been a sensitive and highly emotive issue since independence.

Just like what the Interim Independent Boundaries Review Commission (IIBRC) is under-going, successive electoral commissions never had it smooth, only that the IIBRC is better off as it is guided by law, right from its formation to its mandate and the factors that should dictate its review of constituencies.

This is a break with old tradition where constituencies were increased after every 10 years based on recommendations of the electoral commission to Parliament in an environment where the Executive bulldozed its way in influencing electoral boundary decisions.

Unlike in the past, the IIBRC commissioners were vetted by Parliament before they were appointed.

In performing its work, the IIBRC commissioners were backed-up by technocrats who provided the necessary technical support in navigating the tricky assignment. They borrowed from the experiences of other countries that had recently undertaken review of electoral boundaries.

It is worth noting that the formula used by the IIBRC to review constituencies had been agreed upon by the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) in Naivasha.

Accordingly, the IIBRC used a population quota of 133,138 derived after dividing the country’s population of 38 million people by 290 constituencies. That meant the population quota would be applied on the population of all provinces.

In so doing, the IIBRC was guided by Article 89 of the Constitution, which stipulates that population and geographical size should be considered in boundary demarcation.

This was one of the techniques adopted after the ‘One kilometre one vote’ push by MPs from marginal areas of Northern Kenya was rejected.

The IIBRC proposal on the distribution of 80 new constituencies per province leaked this week, sparking protests from MPs from Central, Coast and Eastern provinces with legislators from Western, Rift Valley and North-Eastern throwing their weight behind the proposal.

IBRC has vowed to go ahead and gazette the report, even as MPs from other regions are against the proposal and have threatened to move to court to block its implementation.

The split among MPs over the report is disturbing. It is our strongest appeal that the standoff should be resolved in the shortest time possible, given the Constitutional mandate of the commission ends on November 27.

Although by law the IIBRC decision will be final and can only be challenged through the High Court, it is prudent to listen to the objections being raised by the MPs from Coast and Central.

Equally, the split between IIBRC commissioners is sickening, given that they were given a mandate to collectively deliver.

Three members of the Mr Andrew Ligale-led commission have argued they were overruled by the chairman and four fellow commissioners after three days of arguing over the mode used to reach the allocation of constituencies.

In leaking the proposal report, the commissioners who might have been responsible for it did not act in the best interest of the commission that had worked together for over one year and had only about two weeks to accomplish its mission and vacate office.

The review of constituencies is just but one of the issues in the wider constitutional changes the country is undergoing, following the adoption of the new Constitution. The splitting and remapping of constituencies is bound to elicit more controversy.

There is need to urgently resolve the standoff over the distribution of new constituencies.

It is unnecessary for the differences brought about by this standoff to distract MPs who had early in the week retreated to the Kenya Institute of Administration (KIA) for appraisal on the implementation process by the Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee (CIOC).

The faster this standoff is adequately resolved either by consensus or through the courts, the better for the push to setting up the foundation for the Second Republic.