BONYO'S BONE: IEBC - Just communicate

Last week, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) issued a communication that ended up doing the exact opposite of what it was meant to achieve.

Instead of informing, it confused and alarmed Kenyans. What should have been a simple clarification turned into unnecessary panic across the country.

For context, the commission intended to reach a specific category of voters—those who may have participated before the 2013 general election but whose biometric data was not captured—and advise them to update their details.

But somewhere between intention and execution, clarity was lost. What Kenyans heard was something entirely different: that all voters registered before 2012 needed to register afresh.

And just like that, a routine update became a national anxiety trigger.

This is precisely why communication, for IEBC, is not a peripheral function. It is the core of its legitimacy.

With 488 days to the next general election, the margin for error is nonexistent. Because elections are not only about systems and processes—they are about trust.

Tonight, let this be a clear reminder to the commission: Kenyans are watching and listening. And they judge in real time.

There is no luxury of missteps followed by clarification, or room for trial and error. There is no space for “we meant to say…”

In electoral management, your first message should be your only message.

Anything that comes after is not clarification—it is damage control, and that erodes confidence.

You must therefore treat every communication as consequential, because at the moment, you are operating from a trust deficit.

With such a background and operating environment, ambiguity is dangerous, while mixed messaging is fatal to your intended destination of the August 10, 2027, general election.

If the goal is to inspire confidence in the electoral process, then communication must be clear, consistent, timely, and precise.

In this electoral cycle, proactivity is not optional. Information must be shared before misinformation fills the gap.

Additionally, communication cannot be one-way. It must involve listening, engaging, and responding. The primary stakeholders in this process are the voters, and they must feel heard, not managed.

As a commission, there must also be recognition of the diversity of the audience—from millennials to Gen Z, who form the bulk of voters and consume information differently. Messaging must be adapted accordingly, without losing accuracy or integrity.

But above all, there must be honesty. Elections are not just about facts—they are about perception, and the perception of integrity is built over time.

One miscommunication may seem small or even trivial, but in an environment already saturated with suspicion, it can be enough to trigger doubt.

So, this is the bottom line: if people do not understand the process, they will not trust the outcome—and that is already a risk to the electoral process.

As a commission, communication must be right the first time, every time. In this process, communication is not just a tool—it is the foundation of legitimacy.