Isaac Hassan tells Anyang' Nyong’o: Do not outsource your failures to IEBC

“Get your facts first, then you can distort them as much as you please,” wrote Mark Twain.

I have always had much respect for Professor Anyang’ Nyong’o’s comments and judgment on social, economic and political issues. His ability to present his views based on fact and in an objective manner are the hallmark of any experienced politician and academic. 

I was left perplexed and disappointed by his recent misguided criticism of both the IEBC and me as the chairman of the electoral commission (The Standard on Sunday, May 18).

To directly respond to a critic, particularly when he is one of our “clients”, an individual who was elected in a process overseen by the IEBC, is not an activity I am keen to indulge in.

For obvious reasons, taking on a politician or political party would suggest that the IEBC, as a non-partisan body is holding a grudge, which is not the case.

Unfortunately, silence is often misinterpreted as an admission of guilt and incompetence, particularly in a society where abrasiveness and sensationalism continue to receive accolades. Due to the continuous anti-IEBC rhetoric being reinforced by both skeptics and those who hold the Commission responsible for electoral results not going their way, the commission is continuously being branded guilty for non-existent crimes.

Recently, we published a comprehensive and detailed account of the election results, the first Electoral Commission in this country to do so in years. Some faulted us for taking a year to release this information, the perfect opportunity for those opposing us to rouse suspicion.

Unfortunately, not one critic has taken the time to look at the results closely or identify the fact that all we as a commission had added to these were details of voter eligibility and turnout.

These exact results were presented to the Parliamentary Committee on Justice soon after the polling ended and were signed by all party agents and pinned on to the doors of the over 30,000 polling stations in Kenya as required by law.

To address Senator Nyong’o’s point that the IEBC is “behaving as if KTNs  Jicho Pevu never happened”, with no offence intended, the show can best be described as airing “hyped fallacy”. For example, it was alleged that votes were stolen in a polling station in Alego Usonga. However, no election actually took place in that particular location and the two registered voters there were moved to another centre.

Jicho Pevu spent much time creating conspiracy theories on the basis of “technology”, it featured a “hacker” breaking into the Kencall system to “prove” that Kencall hosted or shared the IEBC Results Transmission System (RTS) servers.

Firstly, Kencall had nothing to do with the RTS. Furthermore, look closely at the operating database of the hacked site on Jicho Pevu, it shows the Oracle database running on a Microsoft Windows XP 2008 server.

The IEBC did not run RTS on an Oracle database therefore there is no connection between the two. The much-dramatised show of cables forming some type of sinister activity was the exact opposite.

In simplified technological terms, the Kencall and IEBC networks were physically separated and the cables are the works of an independent service provider contracted by Kencall to provide a link between Bomas and Kencall offices allowing for calls to be logged into their central call management server at their headquarters.

Prof Nyong’o also states that he “was convinced well before the March 2013 elections that the IEBC had set itself to deliberately fail Kenyans”.

Yet, despite his doubts he was happy to participate in an election conducted by an entity he was wary of and is happy to hold his office.

His claim that I chose to change the location of the National Tallying Centre from Kasarani to Bomas is baseless. I neither have nor wish to possess such power.

After evaluating all available venues through a suitability survey, Bomas was decided on by the entire commission because it not only fulfilled a huge number of prerequisites in terms of logistics but it had been the location of the tallying centre during the Kenya 2010 Constitutional Referendum.

In reference to his suggestion that the IEBC will be sharing its BVR kits, the Kenya Government’s plan to digitally register citizens is not an IEBC matter.

Commissioners were invited by the Deputy President to provide technical advice regarding biometric registration and we have never said that it would be releasing its BVR kits for Government to use.

The commission recently held a post-election evaluation where it candidly reflected upon its performance, addressed shortcomings and charted the way forward, in a commitment to transparency the outcomes will be shared with all stakeholders. 

Both the IEBC and I have never shied away from admitting any mistakes or challenges we have faced, denial is not a strategy of ours. The management of recent by-elections stands as evidence of the commission’s willingness to improve.

There was no sinister plot to manipulate the elections as implied and despite the glitches in terms of technology which we have openly discussed, no external or internal force had the power to sway the vote or tallying process, the final result correlates with the election data that we have released. 

Retired Judge Johann Kriegler once said “you cannot run an honest election in a dishonest political environment”.

It is my hope that all leaders and political parties in Kenya will carry out their own evaluations in the quest to sanitise our political environment. 

It is now time for politicians to stop placing blame when they find themselves in situations not conducive to their requirements. How is a country to possess a strong electoral system if its management body is being dishonestly discredited time and time again?

Politicians and political parties cannot and should not be allowed to assign, transfer or outsource their own weaknesses to the elections management body.