I remember
this incident with great perspicuity of mind like it happened yesterday. It was
the 27th day of June 2010. It is not because I was a salaried
employee who had been paid, Hell no! I was still in university trying to make
head or tail of my engineering course units, by the way. It is because of the
atrocities which were committed against one team on the football pitch that
overshadowed the auspicious tournament that was that year’s world cup. It was
the eternal rivalry between Germany and England replayed not on the arena of
the World War II battleground but an exhibition of footballing artistry. For
England every manifestation of Murphy’s Law of the universe was coming to pass.
Everything that could go awry did just that. Despite intrinsically focused
effort; England found themselves two goals down in their last 16 clash against
Germany in Bloemfontein, South Africa. The great defender Matthew Upson; not so
revered by the Arsenal fans of yore but more ardently by their West Ham United
counterparts pulled a goal back. Then in a flash the match seemed to have been
turned on its head when Frank Lampard looked to have equalized with a long
range effort that ricocheted off the bar and over the line-with goal keeper
Manuel Neuer well beaten. Jubilation in the England camp knew no bounds. But
this was brought crashing to the substratum of the 40,000 capacity Free State
stadium when referee Jorge Larrionda failed to acknowledge the legitimate goal.
There was immutable gloom interspersed with raw fury among the England faithful
when they went on to lose 4-1. Familiar failings but only fire and brimstone
can aptly portray the scathing tirade delivered by one England fan about the
refereeing of the tournament. “Absolutely farcical and a disgrace,” he
exploded. He was not wrong. Rumour has it that the aforementioned referee could
only mutter, “Mon Dias - Oh my Lord” at the review of the goal footage. The
controversy that ensued from this fiasco was instrumental in the football world
governing associations’ Fifa’s decision to introduce goal-line technology for
the next tournament. Larrionda was barred from involvement for the rest of the
tournament, scant consolation for England. But, I digress.
On Saturday,
26th November 2011, the Standard newspaper ran an article about the
use of ICT deepening democracy in Kenya. An argument was adduced and prosecuted
to its logical conclusion that the use of Information and Communication
Technology will not only increase administrative efficiency but also reduce
recurrent costs and enhance the transparency of the electoral process. Many of
us have only gruesome memories of the 2007 polls which were littered by panoply
of irregularities in the tallying and transmission of returns for the various
positions. This is the quintessential case study of how inadequacies in the
proper use of technology and weak electoral systems can trigger civil unrest,
conflagration and disillusionment with the entire process of democracy. The
absence of a procedure to authenticate democratic choices will only invariably
lead to accusations and counter-accusations of impropriety by the losing party.
Hope parallels can be drawn with my World cup anecdote.
But
even with that said, technology alone cannot solve electoral problems. Indeed,
former USSR dictator Joseph Stalin once quipped, “those who cast the votes
decide nothing, but those who count them decide everything.” Even in despotic
pride he still captured the hot mess that is the electoral system in many
countries that purport to exercise democracy. In the absence of safeguards, independence,
fairness, integrity and justice; the incumbent will always have a colossus-like
influence hovering over the entire process. In Kenya, even before the elections
the opposition leaders were already up in arms over perceived irregularities in
the appointment of the commissioners. In their eyes the team looked to have
been hand-picked by the incumbent with the sole aim of doing his bidding.
Assurances on the automation of voter registration and transmission of result
were given by the outgoing Chairman of the electoral and boundaries commission
pursuant to the provisions of section 44 of the IEBC Act of 2011. Come 2017
elections the electronic vote management and transmission system was up and
running. It seemed to operate like clockwork. This was until some glaring ICT
related issues were brought to the fore by one of the presidential candidates
whom the results looked to be heavily steeped against. For the issues of
legality, he would have found someone to rebuff his claims. But when matters
came to Servers, SQL, Admin rights, DLL, Oracle, Logins and other technical ICT
stuff rejoinders became mumbled and far-in-between. “An attempt was made to
hack the system but was unsuccessful,” was all the Chairman could proffer. This
is a half-hearted and unconvincing retort insufficient to assuage any skeptic who
already had innate and niggling misgivings about the process but that is all
they came up with on that front. Here; surprisingly for career Lawyers and
Public relation practitioners, speech became silvern as silence was golden.
Then it dawned upon me that none of the commissioners had sufficient skill, competencies
or even a passing inclination to matters ICT.
All
these ladies and gentlemen are people of great renown in their fields. Wafula
Wanyonyi Chebukati is an advocate; a lawyer of many years experience and
unquestionable standing. As a Corporate lawyer, he helped develop Kenya’s
maritime policy while working as the managing partner of a prestigious legal
practice in Nairobi. Consolata Nkatha Bucha; the Vice-chairperson, holds two
diplomas in Public relations and business studies from the London Chamber of
Commerce. She also has a Master of Science degree in Public relations. Dr.
Roselyn Akombe is an accomplished professional with a PhD in Global affairs
with experience as an Under-secretary at the United Nations headquarters, New
York. She is laden with 15 years experience in global electoral practice. Mr.
Boya Molu has degrees in human resource management and business administration.
Dr. Paul Kibiwott Kurgat is a former ambassador to Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and
Kazakhstan. He holds a PhD in History from Moi University, a Masters Degree in
International relations from Kiev State University and diplomas in peace,
security and conflict resolution. Margaret Wanjala Mwachanya has a Masters
degree in Swahili studies, having studied in Kenya and Israel. Prof Abdi Yakub
Guliye has a PhD in animal nutrition from Scotland. He has previous election
experience managing the Egerton University, Njoro campus elections. Even Ezra
Chiloba, the Secretary to the Commission and CEO of the IEBC, who prima facie
looks like an IT geek and guru is not one. He possesses a Masters degree in
Public policy and is a Doctoral candidate at University of Nairobi in Political
Science and Government. After a Bachelor Degree in Law he distinguished himself
in the civil society and United Nations projects.
Looking
through their profiles one question itched my conscience like a very determined
louse. Where is the ICT professional commissioner among all these veritable individuals
tasked to chaperone an ICT powered election? Who is likely to explain with even
intermediate level cogency when any query relating to technology arises? And
true to form these questions arose and no one stood up to be counted. So now we
have an election petition in the Supreme Court premised upon issues surrounding
the Kenya Integrated Elections Management System. Director of ICT in the
organization, now the dearly departed Chris Msando disappeared one week to the
elections roiling an already muddled mix. It may neither be here nor there, but
this has raised a genuine concern about if his cruel murder was a ploy to
sabotage and irrevocably compromise the KIEMS system. Only time will tell. This
only serves to add impetus to the opposition’s claims of electronic vote tally
manipulation using the late Msando’s credentials.
But the
real question here is why the role of ICT has to be this relegated in the
hierarchy of the organization? This is no doubt a scathing indictment on a body
that was trying to put a front as the harbinger of Information Technology and
automation to its peers. Going forward, it will be prudent to have a fully
fledged Commissioner who is technically adroit and can unequivocally field
questions from the gallery on matters IT, run a computer simulation and even shock
the audience by successfully trouble-shooting the system silencing any chatter-box
naysayers for posterity. I have watched the Canadian Prime Minister; Justin
Trudeau, academically extinguishing a journalist on Computer Science matters a
feat I would have been proud to witness at the IEBC briefings. Instead we were
put through the excruciating charade that was Ezra Chiloba being hounded off the
eligible bachelor and knight-in-shining-armour pedestal which was an inexcusably
self-effacing distraction by his colleague, if I should be kind to the lady. If
not we risk disenfranchising professionals in the technical field who will view
a career path with the electoral commission as a virtual dead-end, a path to
perdition. Who then will run tests that will ultimately yield a fool-proof
system we can all be proud of? Will we import human capital too in the face of
all this unemployment? With advancement in technology we will eventually join
the bandwagon of countries with fully-fledged electronic poll systems. As has
already been manifested, will we put these systems under individuals who have
no inkling of the goings-on, cannot perform a cost-benefit analysis of the
system and who can only fire a blank and look to the sky when the system inevitably
decides to fail? As our very own Attorney General once put it while trying to
defend the manual voter backup register use for electoral purpose, “all electronic
systems ultimately fail!” Denigrating the toil and functional integrity of
other professionals is a staple for the consummate lawyer, indeed.
In
summary, we need not put our democracy under trial. We must cherish it as to aspire
never to sacrifice it at the altar of manipulable and under-managed electronic
systems. Any technology no matter how advanced will only function effectively
with well greased mechanisms and effective manpower around it for audit and
control, most crucially at the higher echelons of the organization. Near
perfection will only be a consequence of consistent, organized and well
intentioned improvements.
