• IEBC to use a complementary system for voter identification and transmission of results.
•Jubilee Secretary Raphael Tuju castigates the bill's critics as being in a hurry to conclude.
Image: FILE
National Assembly Majority leader Amos Kimunya has urged Kenyans to be patient with parliamentarians as they consider the Elections (Amendment) Bill, 2022.
The Kipipiri MP said the sentiments portraying the law as having already been passed were misplaced and were causing unnecessary anxiety.
Disclosing that the bill came from the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, the lawmaker said there was still room to consider the amendments.
Kimunya also gave reasons why he sponsored the bill on behalf of the IEBC and why the same was not by the Justice and Legal Affairs Committee (JLAC) of the National Assembly.
Speaking for the first time after the uproar on the proposed law, the MP said his sponsorship of the legislation was to give the committee chaired by Kangema MP Muturi Kigano the required independence to interrogate the bill.
“I brought the bill on behalf of IEBC since they can’t do one. Had JLAC proposed the bill, they would lose the interrogative independence. They can now interrogate this bill from an independent perspective other than defending their own bill,” Kimunya said.
“If they are the ones sponsoring and then stakeholders appear, they will be defending their bill. That is why we decided it goes through my office before being committed to the committee.”
Kimunya further urged Kenyans raising concerns about public participation to exercise patience as the process is yet to begin.
“After the first reading, people can officially go to JLAC to propose amendments. The whole point is that JLAC could not have brought it and be the ones to interrogate it.”
He was joined by Jubilee Party Secretary General Raphael Tuju who argued that the bill was still going to be subjected to debate in Parliament.
“The process in Parliament includes public participation and gives an opportunity for any amendment that may be necessary to ensure it doesn’t come up with any issues that cause anxiety,” Tuju said.
Terming the sharp reactions on the proposed law as ‘a storm in a tea cup’, Tuju said, “Anything in conflict with the Constitution will be amended.”
“There is a lot of room for appropriate amendments to make it palatable for all of us. There is mischief the bill is seeking to cure but there will be a provision in Parliament to amend the legislation,” the Cabinet Secretary said.
In the proposed law, IEBC chairman Wafula Chebukati would only be allowed to declare the presidential results after receiving results from the 290 constituencies.
The changes also seek to allow the IEBC to use a complementary system for voter identification and transmission of results.
Returning officers managing the election would have to travel to Nairobi with the results after transmitting the same electronically.
Kimunya indicated that he took charge of the bills because those from his office can be processed faster compared with ones from a committee or individual members.
“It is quicker to process it through this route. Why my office sponsored the bill should not be an issue. Let people discuss the bill. That is why it is exposed,” Kimunya added.
He further castigated critics of some of the proposals among the complementary system of transmission of results which he said was in the existing laws.
“The issue of complementary mechanism is already in the law. The only thing that could be new is the live streaming element. We expect the IEBC will justify and then parliament will decide what is best for Kenyans,” he said.
Kimunya said there was room to amend or retain the proposals in the bill as would be justified by the source – the IEBC.
“People should not talk as if Parliament has passed the law. This is only a proposal before Parliament from an independent institution which I have moved on their behalf,” he said.
The Majority leader accused their rivals Tangatanga of poisoning people on the proposals in the bill, reiterating that the changes were in line with the Supreme Court ruling that nullified the first 2017 presidential elections.
“Our friends from the other side don’t want the changes, which largely stem from the Supreme Court ruling. There are things in the law that need to be changed to align with the Constitution.”
He added that the courts have also ruled some of the sections unconstitutional.
“What we need is to let people argue and bring reservations on the clauses that are problematic. No one will bring a bad law.”
“If one allowed a bad election law, it is in our common interest to ensure the election law is good for everyone and for posterity,” Kimunya said.