The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission IEBC plans to scrap voter cards ahead of the 2027 general elections and rely entirely on biometric verification using national identity cards or passports at polling stations. The move is designed to cut costs, reduce fraud, and streamline the voting process.
But as Kenya inches closer to the next election cycle, the decision has ignited debate over its feasibility, fairness, and the integrity of Kenya’s electoral systems. This article unpacks the rationale behind the IEBC’s decision, the inherent risks of going fully biometric, past system failures, reactions from political players, and comparative insights from other countries that use biometric electoral technology.
Why the IEBC Plans to Scrap Voter Cards
According to IEBC insiders and public statements, voter cards are no longer seen as necessary in an era where biometric voter registration (BVR) and electronic voter identification (EVID) systems are in place.
One of the key reasons behind this shift is the high cost associated with the production and management of voter cards. Every election cycle, the commission spends tens of millions of shillings on printing new cards, distributing them across the country, and replacing lost or damaged ones. This expenditure is increasingly viewed as unnecessary in light of digital verification capabilities.
Another major concern is the vulnerability of voter cards to misuse and fraud. The IEBC has encountered cases where individuals attempt to vote using multiple cards or present cards that do not match records in the central voter registry. These loopholes undermine the credibility of the electoral process and pose a significant threat to free and fair elections.
The commission also argues that voter cards are redundant because all essential voter information already exists in the biometric database. During elections, this data can be securely accessed and verified using a national ID or passport, making a separate voter card unnecessary in ensuring accurate and efficient voter identification.
Challenges With Biometric Verification in Previous Elections
Despite the promise of biometric verification, Kenya’s experience with the system has been rocky. During the 2022 general election, the biometric voter identification kits, commonly known as KIEMS (Kenya Integrated Elections Management System), faced numerous failures that significantly disrupted the voting process in several areas.
One of the most widespread issues was the malfunctioning of KIEMS devices across the country. At many polling stations, the kits either failed to recognize voters’ fingerprints or refused to power on altogether. In Nairobi’s Embakasi East constituency, for example, several polling centers were forced to revert to manual registers after repeated failures to verify registered voters biometrically.
The situation drew high-profile complaints, particularly from then-Azimio presidential candidate Raila Odinga, who raised concerns about the system’s credibility. His campaign argued that the delays and inability to verify voters in some of his strongholds unfairly suppressed turnout. These failures were later included in a legal petition challenging the presidential election results.
Compounding the problem was the inconsistent use of manual backup systems. While the law permits polling stations to fall back on printed voter registers when biometric systems fail, the actual application of this policy varied widely. Some polling centers denied voters the chance to use the manual register despite evident technical glitches, while others allowed it without clear protocols, raising questions about the uniformity and fairness of the process.
Another critical challenge was the lack of proper training and weak connectivity in remote regions. In places like Turkana, Kitui, and parts of Mandera, polling officials struggled to operate the KIEMS kits effectively. Limited access to technical support and poor internet connectivity meant that some polling stations were left without functional verification systems for extended periods, further undermining the credibility and efficiency of the election.
The 2022 election, therefore, raised critical concerns: can Kenya fully rely on a biometric-only system when infrastructure gaps, technical limitations, and capacity issues still exist?
What Happens Without Voter Cards?
Without voter cards, voters will be required to present either a national ID or passport at polling stations. The KIEMS kits will then retrieve the individual’s biometric data, such as fingerprints or facial recognition, from the IEBC’s database to verify their identity before allowing them to vote.
While this process appears efficient on the surface, it presents several potential pitfalls that could compromise the credibility of the election. One major concern is that the failure of biometric kits could disenfranchise voters if manual registers are completely eliminated. In cases where fingerprint scanners or facial recognition fails to work, and no backup system is in place, eligible voters could be unfairly turned away from the ballot box.
Another issue is the potential impact on voter turnout. If voters are uncertain about whether the system will successfully recognize their identity, especially in regions with a history of technical failures, they may choose not to show up on election day. The fear of being turned away or delayed could discourage participation and skew electoral outcomes.
There is also the risk of legal ambiguity concerning voter eligibility if disputes arise over failed biometric verification. Without clear legal frameworks and consistent protocols on how to handle such incidents, disagreements could emerge during or after the elections, potentially leading to court challenges, mistrust in the system, or even unrest.
Political analyst Prof. Macharia Munene warns that such a transition must be supported by public education and proper testing. “The question isn’t whether biometrics work, it’s whether they’ll work on the day that matters most,” he says.
Could This Lead to More Electoral Uncertainties 2027?
With Kenya’s history of high-stakes elections and politically charged environments, any perceived flaw in the voting process could trigger unrest. The 2027 elections are expected to be particularly intense, with early signs of political realignment, potential comeback bids by past candidates, and strong voter sentiments.
A fully biometric system could serve as a powerful tool of credibility if it functions seamlessly. When the technology works as intended—verifying voters quickly, accurately, and consistently—it can significantly boost public confidence in the fairness, transparency, and integrity of the electoral process. A smooth and reliable verification experience reassures citizens that every vote counts and that the system is secure from fraud or manipulation.
On the other hand, the same system could become a flashpoint for disputes if it fails or is perceived to be flawed. High-profile politicians or their supporters may question the legitimacy of the results if the technology malfunctions in certain regions, appears biased in its failures, or results in the mass exclusion of voters. In such a scenario, the biometric system could trigger widespread mistrust, legal challenges, and even political unrest, especially in an already tense electoral environment.
The IEBC’s track record and transparency will be under the spotlight. Any systemic failures could become a basis for post-election petitions, street protests, or worse—escalating tensions into violence, as witnessed in past elections like 2007.
What Other Countries Are Doing Right With Biometric Verification
Several countries around the world have successfully implemented biometric verification in elections. Key examples include:
- India
The world’s largest democracy uses biometric-linked voter ID systems known as EPIC (Electors Photo Identity Card), tied to fingerprints and Aadhaar data. While India does not rely entirely on biometrics to cast a vote, it uses them to maintain an accurate voter roll and to prevent double registration. Crucially, India still uses a voter card as a backup identity mechanism.
- Ghana
In Ghana’s 2020 elections, biometric verification was mandatory, and voters without verified fingerprints could not vote. However, Ghana’s Electoral Commission ensured multiple redundancies, like backup kits and mobile technicians for every polling zone. The system worked with over 99% efficiency, and biometric failures were resolved on the spot in most cases.
- Estonia
Estonia stands at the frontier of digital elections, allowing fully online voting authenticated through digital ID cards embedded with biometric chips. The system is buttressed by advanced cybersecurity infrastructure and enjoys widespread trust, owing to public engagement and government transparency.
- Nigeria
Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) introduced the BVAS system (Biometric Voter Accreditation System) in the 2023 elections. Despite technical hitches, the system was lauded for improving vote credibility in many regions, though political tensions arose due to delays in real-time transmission of results.
Kenya’s biometric systems are technologically sound but logistically uneven. Unlike Estonia, Kenya lacks universal digital identity adoption. Unlike Ghana, Kenya does not always deploy backup kits consistently. Unlike Nigeria, it still grapples with trust deficits in electoral management.
Where Kenya lags is not in the adoption of biometric systems—but in infrastructure, personnel training, public education, and a strong legal framework that governs what happens when systems fail.
Recommendations for IEBC and Stakeholders
To avoid the 2027 general election turning into a technological and political disaster, the IEBC must take deliberate and proactive measures to strengthen the biometric voting system and rebuild public trust in the electoral process.
First, the commission should conduct national stress tests of the biometric systems. These pilot tests must be held across varied environments, including urban, rural, and remote areas, to assess the real-world performance of KIEMS kits, the availability of internet connectivity, and the preparedness of polling officials. Such trials will help identify weaknesses well before election day and allow time for corrective action.
Secondly, it is critical to deploy backup kits and ensure mobile technical support is readily available. Every polling centre should be equipped with at least one spare device and have access to on-call technicians who can resolve issues swiftly. This would minimise downtime caused by hardware failures and ensure continuity in the verification process.
The IEBC must also work to ensure legal clarity regarding the use of manual registers. Clear legislation and election guidelines must stipulate what procedures to follow when biometric verification fails. These provisions should guarantee fallback options that preserve the voter’s right to cast their ballot while preventing loopholes that could be exploited to manipulate outcomes.
Public awareness campaigns will be equally important in this transition. Kenyans must be well-informed about how voting will function without voter cards, what forms of identification will be accepted, and how biometric verification works. If left unaddressed, misinformation or confusion could lower voter turnout or erode confidence in the system.
Finally, the biometric voter register must be thoroughly audited ahead of the election. An independent verification of the database will ensure that all eligible voters are correctly listed, their biometric data is up-to-date, and any errors are addressed well in advance. This is a crucial step in preventing exclusion, duplication, or disputes over registration on election day.
Political Reactions So Far
Though formal campaigns are yet to peak, murmurs have begun from both ruling and opposition camps. UDA officials largely support the IEBC plan, saying it will reduce fraud. ODM insiders, however, are cautious, recalling the biometric failures that allegedly affected turnout in their strongholds.
Former IEBC commissioner Roselyn Akombe, now based in the US, posted on X: “Tech-based elections are only as strong as the institutions behind them. Biometric-only voting without full safeguards is risky for Kenya’s democracy.”
What Next For IEBC And Kenya?
The IEBC’s plan to scrap voter cards is a bold step into the future, but it is not without risks. A fully biometric election process can boost transparency and modernize Kenyan democracy, but only if the right safeguards, infrastructure, and legal frameworks are in place.
As 2027 draws nearer, the success or failure of this transition could very well determine the credibility of the elections and shape the nation’s political trajectory for years to come.
ALSO READ: IEBC Portal Outage Sparks Transparency Concerns Ahead of 2027 General Elections
