WHEN SYSTEMS MEET POLITICS: LESSONS FROM THE KERICHO
COUNTY ASSEMBLY E-IMPEACHMENT VOTE
By Justin Njeru
The unsuccessful impeachment of Governor Dr. Eric Mutai in Kericho County has left behind
more than just political drama. It has given us, as ICT and governance professionals, a real-world
case study of how technology, politics, and human integrity intersect.
In the County Assembly, 33 members voted for impeachment, surpassing the constitutional twothirds threshold of 32. Yet, when the matter moved to the Senate, two members recanted their votes
via affidavit, blaming the online voting system. The session was televised, ICT experts were summoned,
and the system’s authenticity and reliability were subjected to scrutiny. Despite the technical
assurances, political back-and-forth nearly turned a system’s credibility into a scapegoat.
This incident offers ACPK members invaluable lessons on systems development cycles and
implementation in politically charged environments:
1. Technology Cannot Fix Integrity Gaps
No matter how robust a system is, its credibility depends on the people using it. Systems can
enforce rules, capture logs, and provide audit trails. But when users are willing to change
their positions for political expediency, even the best code cannot guarantee integrity.
Developers and implementers must therefore anticipate the “human factor” in risk
assessments.
2. The Importance of Transparent SDLC Processes
From requirements gathering to deployment, the System Development Life Cycle (SDLC)
should emphasize user buy-in, transparency, and security. If the Assembly members had
been thoroughly trained, briefed, and sensitized about the system’s functionality, it would
have been harder to disown their votes. Adequate user acceptance testing (UAT) is not just a
technical step, it’s a shield against future disputes.
3. Auditability is Non-Negotiable
In contested environments, systems must provide ironclad audit trails; who logged in, from
where, and at what time. Independent observers should be able to verify the logs without
doubt. In the Kericho case, had the affidavits not been politically motivated, the system’s
audit logs could have spoken louder than shifting political loyalties.
4. System Deployment Must Consider Political Context
Deploying ICT systems in political institutions is different from corporate rollouts. In
politics, perception often outweighs fact. A secure and technically sound system may still be
delegitimized if stakeholders perceive it as biased or flawed. Engaging political actors early,
demonstrating transparency, and involving neutral third parties during rollout can help to
safeguard against post-event disputes.
5. Staff Integrity is as Critical as System Integrity
Even the most sophisticated platforms depend on the administrators and support staff
behind them. A compromised administrator can do more damage than a faulty algorithm.
Counties and public institutions must therefore institute integrity checks, separation of
duties, and access controls to ensure trust in the system.
6. Technology Shines a Light; But People Control the Switch
The Kericho impeachment vote was televised, a rare example of transparency in county
governance. Technology can indeed help shine a light on accountability. But the decision of
whether that light exposes truth or shadows depends on the integrity of the actors involved.
In Closing;
The Kericho case should remind us that systems don’t fail in isolation; people fail them. As
ACPK professionals, we must design systems that are robust, auditable, and transparent. But
equally, we must advocate for ethics, integrity, and accountability among the very institutions
that adopt these systems.
After all, in governance, the greatest risk to ICT is not a coding error; it is political
shenanigans.