Election Reform Bill: What Proposed IEBC Technology and Nomination Changes Mean for 2027

Kenya’s National Assembly is considering changes to election law that could reshape how the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission handles nominations, voter registration and election technology ahead of the 2027 General Election.

MPs debated the Elections (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, Senate Bill No. 29 of 2024, at Second Reading on October 6. Parliament says the proposals arise from recommendations of the National Dialogue Committee and are intended to align the Elections Act with the Constitution, the Political Parties Act and court decisions.

What Parliament debated

According to the National Assembly, Tharaka MP George Murugara told the House that the Bill seeks to clarify the roles of political parties and IEBC in party nominations and candidate registration.

The proposals also address what happens to voter registration when a by-election is called. Instead of suspending registration more broadly, the Bill would limit the suspension to the electoral area where the by-election is taking place.

That distinction matters because continuous voter registration is an important part of election preparation. A local contest should not unnecessarily prevent eligible voters elsewhere from registering.

Why election technology remains central

Separate electoral reform proposals being processed in Parliament would strengthen IEBC’s control over technology used in elections, including systems used to identify voters and transmit or manage results.

One proposal would require intellectual-property rights to procured election technology to vest in IEBC and would require the technology to be accessible for scrutiny by candidates, courts and other persons authorised by law.

The proposals have attracted attention because disputes over access to election technology have featured prominently in previous election petitions. Clear rules established before an election can reduce uncertainty about who controls systems and how authorised scrutiny should take place.

What server localisation would mean

Proposals before Parliament also seek to have election servers hosted in Kenya. The argument for local hosting centres on legal jurisdiction, operational control, data governance and IEBC’s ability to access systems for which it is responsible.

Local hosting alone would not guarantee a credible election. Cybersecurity, independent audits, access controls, procurement standards, backup systems and transparent procedures would still matter. The useful question for voters is therefore not simply where a server is located, but whether the overall election technology can be independently verified and lawfully scrutinised.

Access to election information

The reform package also addresses access to election information. Proposed provisions would require IEBC to facilitate access to information, including election technology, and would remove charges where requested information is supplied electronically in circumstances covered by the law.

Faster access can become particularly important during election disputes, where courts operate under strict constitutional timelines. Delayed access to evidence can affect the ability of parties and judges to test claims before deadlines expire.

Candidate nominations and party responsibility

The Bill debated on October 6 also seeks to clarify the relationship between political parties and IEBC during nominations. Parties are responsible for selecting their candidates, while IEBC is responsible for registering candidates who meet the legal requirements.

Clearer boundaries can reduce disputes in which party nomination problems are transferred to the electoral commission after internal party processes have already taken place.

What has not changed yet

The proposals should not be confused with law already in force. A Bill passing through debate in Parliament can still be amended, rejected or changed during subsequent stages.

Kenyans should therefore be cautious about social-media posts claiming that Parliament has already permanently changed election servers, candidate registration or other procedures. The final legal position depends on completion of the parliamentary process and, where required, presidential assent.

Why the timing matters

IEBC is already preparing for the August 10, 2027 General Election. Electoral rules are most useful when they are settled early enough for the commission, political parties, courts, candidates and voters to understand them before campaigns and nominations intensify.

Late changes can create operational pressure and political suspicion, particularly where procurement or election technology is involved.

What voters should watch next

• Whether MPs amend the current Bills during committee stages.
• The final provisions on election technology ownership and access.
• Rules governing scrutiny of servers and other digital election materials.
• Any changes to voter-registration procedures during by-elections.
• IEBC regulations needed to implement legislation that eventually becomes law.

The bigger issue is public confidence

Election technology is politically sensitive because voters rarely interact directly with the underlying servers, software and databases. Confidence therefore depends heavily on rules that can be explained and independently tested.

Strong legislation cannot by itself guarantee trust, but clear procurement requirements, transparent access procedures and defined institutional responsibilities can reduce avoidable disputes.

As Parliament continues considering the reforms, the most important distinction for the public is between proposals and enacted law. Daily Report KE will update this explainer as the Bills move through the legislative process.

Sources and verification

This article was independently prepared from the National Assembly’s October 6, 2026 report on the Elections (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill and official IEBC information on ongoing electoral preparations.