Situation report: IEBC status

As of June 4, 2025, the status of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) remains a matter of national importance, drawing public attention to issues of legality, transparency, and timely service delivery. Here’s a breakdown of the key considerations surrounding the IEBC’s current situation:

Legitimacy and Legal Framework

The recruitment of IEBC commissioners has followed a structured, democratic, and legally anchored process conducted under public scrutiny. The process has adhered strictly to the law, ensuring that Kenyans were taken through a transparent and accountable public engagement.

Importantly, the Constitution of Kenya does not permit a vacuum within the IEBC due to its critical role in maintaining democratic order. The legal framework also provides clear channels for redress, allowing for objections and appeals without disrupting institutional continuity.

Handling of Grievances

All grievances concerning the recruitment process must follow due legal procedure, and should only be raised after the conclusion of the process. Attempts to contest or delegitimize the recruitment midstream are seen as deliberate efforts to derail progress and create unnecessary tension.

Claims that the process is flawed before its completion are not only premature but also unfounded and misleading, especially to the public who have a right to an impartial electoral commission.

Institutional Integrity and Public Perception

While concerns have been raised about the suitability of certain nominees, such matters are best addressed through Parliament’s constitutional vetting process, which is in place to uphold the integrity of public appointments.

Political leaders attempting to interfere or influence the process for personal or partisan gain undermine both the objectivity and independence of the IEBC. Turning the appointment into a political contest erodes public trust and diverts the process from its legal mandate.

Timeliness and Public Interest

Further delays in constituting the Commission pose a significant threat to Kenya’s constitutional order and democratic operations. Notably, one of the major demands from the recent Gen Z protests was the urgent formation of a functional IEBC.

The responsible institutions have since responded by initiating a bipartisan, inclusive, and legally compliant process, aligning with public expectations and national interest.

Delays in completing this process not only risk unpreparedness for the 2027 General Election, but also stall critical by-elections, leaving some areas without representation. The injunctions or tactics to postpone the process stand in contrast to the legal goal of maintaining order, and ultimately harm the public interest.

Conclusion

The IEBC’s proper and timely constitution is not just a matter of institutional procedure—it is a constitutional imperative and a public right. The law is designed to create order, and any action that causes further delays threatens to erode public trust, stall democratic progress, and violate the rights of millions of Kenyans. As the process moves forward, stakeholders are urged to place national interest above individual preferences, allowing legal institutions to complete their work without undue interference.