Lawmakers have rejected a bill that sought to allow the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) to use additional non-population criteria in the delimitation of electoral boundaries. The decision followed opposition from key stakeholders, including the IEBC, the Electoral Law and Governance Institute for Africa (ELGIA), the Office of the Attorney-General (OAG), and the Inter-Religious Council of Kenya (IRCK), who argued that some of the proposals were redundant and had already been addressed.
The Justice and Legal Affairs Committee (JLAC), which reviewed the bill, noted that Laikipia East MP Mwangi Kiunjuri, the bill’s sponsor, had agreed to harmonize its provisions with the IEBC Amendment Bill, which was subsequently signed into law by President William Ruto.
In its report, the committee stated: “The Bill is now spent since the amendments, as agreed between the sponsor and IEBC, have been enacted into law. In light of this, the Committee resolved to recommend that the House reject the Bill.”
Kiunjuri had argued that the proposed amendments aimed to resolve population inequalities within constituencies, which he claimed undermined universal suffrage and fair representation. He emphasized that while all Kenyans have an equal opportunity to vote, disparities in constituency sizes weaken the weight of individual votes.
“Current electoral inequalities cannot be resolved within a single-member constituency system like ours,” Kiunjuri said. “In urban areas, we risk having unreasonably small constituencies, while in rural areas, constituency sizes may become so vast that effective representation is impossible.”
However, in its memorandum to the committee, IEBC maintained that the procedure for boundary delimitation is already clearly outlined in the Constitution. The Commission cited Article 89, which establishes population quota guidelines and argued that any deviation from these principles would be unconstitutional.
“The proposals contained in the Bill were already addressed in the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (Amendment) Bill 2024. Therefore, the National Assembly should consider withdrawing or rejecting the current Bill,” the IEBC memorandum stated.
The OAG supported the bill in part but noted that some provisions had already been repealed by the IEBC (Amendment) Bill 2024. It recommended that these sections be omitted. ELGIA acknowledged that the definition of “population quota” is already in the Constitution but supported incorporating it into the legal framework governing boundary delimitation. The organization also backed expanding the Act’s objectives to provide a clearer framework for constituency and ward boundaries.
Meanwhile, IRCK and the Office of the Registrar of Political Parties (ORPP) supported the bill’s inclusion of the population quota definition, stating that it aligns with Article 89 and would provide a clear basis for determining electoral boundaries.
Ultimately, the committee’s recommendation led to the bill’s rejection, affirming that the delimitation process remains governed by constitutional provisions and recent legislative amendments.
