How MPs’ decision on election livestreaming could affect Kenya’s 2027 polls

The proposed changes would remove the legal requirement for IEBC to livestream results as they are announced at polling stations, raising questions about transparency and public scrutiny ahead of the 2027 General Election.

Kenya’s preparations for the 2027 General Election have entered a new phase of debate after the National Assembly passed the Elections (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill, 2024, which seeks to remove the legal requirement for the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) to livestream election results from polling stations.

The decision, made on Thursday, October 22, 2026, could change how Kenyans, political parties, election observers and journalists follow the counting and transmission of votes during the next General Election.

The Bill, which was approved by the Senate in December 2024 before being forwarded to the National Assembly, seeks to amend Section 39 of the Elections Act, which governs the determination, transmission and declaration of election results.

At the centre of the debate is a provision requiring the IEBC to establish a mechanism for livestreaming results as they are announced at polling stations.

Removing this requirement would mean the commission would no longer be legally compelled under that provision to livestream the announcements.

However, it would not necessarily prevent the IEBC from providing live broadcasts voluntarily.

The proposed amendments seek to remove the express legal requirement for livestreaming while retaining provisions requiring the IEBC to determine, declare and publish election results immediately after polling closes.

The distinction is important because livestreaming, electronic transmission and online publication serve different purposes in the electoral process.

Livestreaming allows the public to watch results being announced at polling stations in real time.

Electronic transmission moves results through the electoral system, while an online portal enables citizens to access and examine published results documents.

The proposed changes would therefore remove one form of public access without automatically ending electronic transmission or online publication of results.

The framework also retains procedures for transmitting presidential election results, verifying figures and publishing polling-station results forms.

Results declared at polling stations would remain final under the proposed wording, while the IEBC would continue to perform its constitutional responsibilities in tallying and declaring presidential results.

The removal of the livestreaming requirement does not, by itself, mean presidential results would be determined without electronic transmission or verification.

However, how the results are transmitted, verified, published and compared with the figures announced at polling stations would remain central to public confidence in the process.

Livestreaming gives voters, political parties, journalists and election observers an opportunity to follow the announcement of results as it happens.

It can help the public compare figures announced at polling stations with those subsequently transmitted, tallied and declared at higher levels.

The debate is particularly sensitive in Kenya, where electoral transparency and the credibility of presidential results have remained major public concerns since the disputed 2007 General Election.

The 2010 Constitution established principles of free and fair elections, including transparency, impartiality, accuracy and accountability.

During the parliamentary debate, Suba South MP Caroli Omondi raised concerns about changes to the presidential results framework, arguing that Parliament needed to carefully examine how presidential results are tallied, verified and communicated to the public.

Critics of removing the livestreaming requirement argue that it could reduce the public’s ability to monitor results announcements in real time.

They have questioned whether relying on electronic transmission and published result forms alone would provide the same level of immediate public scrutiny.

The central question is whether the remaining safeguards will provide sufficient and timely access to results, even without a mandatory live feed.

The debate also featured a dispute after Kirinyaga Woman Representative Njeri Maina alleged that non-Kenyans were being registered as voters.

Maina told the House that reports had emerged of identification cards being issued to people who were not Kenyan citizens.

The Speaker demanded that she substantiate the allegation or withdraw it and apologise to the House.

The exchange added to a heated sitting in which MPs considered amendments to the Bill before it passed its third reading.

The proposed changes could affect how the public follows the announcement of election results, particularly during the presidential tallying process.

If the provision is enacted without a mandatory livestreaming requirement, the IEBC would not be legally compelled under that provision to provide a live feed of results as they are announced at polling stations.

Kenyans would still need to rely on the remaining legal procedures governing electronic transmission, result forms, verification, publication and official declarations.

The distinction matters because access to results documents and the ability to watch results being announced in real time serve related but different purposes.

The next steps in the legislative process will determine the Bill’s final legal status and the framework that will govern the 2027 polls.

Ultimately, the debate centres on how Kenya can maintain transparent, verifiable and credible elections while ensuring that results are transmitted and declared in accordance with the law.

Rono is a digital journalist with a proven track record in newsroom leadership and content creation. Currently a Digital Writer for People Daily Digital, Emmanuel’s career is rooted in a lifelong passion for storytelling. Let’s talk here: [email protected] or [email protected]