A political party linked to Busia Senator Okiya Omtatah has moved to court to challenge the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission’s (IEBC) decision to relax several mandatory security specifications for ballot papers ahead of the 2027 General Election.
The National Reconstruction Alliance (NRA) Party argues that the changes could weaken safeguards designed to protect ballot papers against counterfeiting, duplication and manipulation, raising concerns about the integrity and verifiability of the electoral process.
The High Court has certified the petition as urgent and directed the respondents, including the IEBC, to respond within seven days. The matter will be mentioned on October 14 for directions.
In its petition, the party challenges Addendum Number. 3/Clarifications dated September 17, 2026, through which the Commission introduced what it described as a “technical relaxation to optimise cost and timelines” in the procurement of ballot papers and other electoral materials.
The dispute stems from a tender advertised on August 11, 2026, for the supply of ballot papers and other electoral materials under an open international tender for a three-year framework contract.
The original tender document prescribed a range of security features, including uniquely generated guilloche patterns integrated with variable data, micro-text incorporating variable data, machine-readable QR codes designed to prevent duplication, and tapered serial numbers printed using multicoloured ink.
A voter uses a plastic tub to secure privacy to mark her ballot paper at a polling station in Kampala, Uganda, on January 14, 2021.
Photo credit: AFP
However, the subsequent addendum permits single-colour black serialisation instead of multicoloured serialisation, static guilloche patterns and micro-text in place of variable formats, and blind embossing without metallic foil stamping.
Other safeguards, including watermarks, ultraviolet security elements and anti-duplication QR codes, remain mandatory.
The party argues that the commission has not demonstrated that the revised specifications offer protection equivalent to, or greater than, that provided by the original requirements.
“The issue is not whether individual security features remain in place, but whether the cumulative reduction of previously mandatory safeguards diminishes the ability of ballot papers to resist imitation, duplication, substitution or manipulation,” the party states in its court papers.
NRA maintains that the changes raise constitutional questions that go beyond procurement specifications or cost-saving measures.
“A ballot paper is not an ordinary procurement commodity. It is one of the primary physical instruments through which the sovereign will of the people of Kenya, protected under Article 1 of the Constitution and exercised through Article 38, is expressed and ascertained,” the petition states.
The NRA says the dispute concerns the IEBC’s constitutional obligation to maintain a secure, transparent, accountable and verifiable electoral system, rather than the commercial terms of the tender.
It has invoked Articles 38, 81 and 86 of the Constitution, which address political rights and the requirements for free, fair, secure, accurate, transparent and verifiable elections. It also cites Article 227, which requires public procurement to be cost-effective, fair, equitable, transparent and competitive.
The party argues that the pursuit of cost savings and shorter timelines cannot justify reducing electoral security safeguards without evidence that the revised specifications maintain the required level of protection.
It further warns that changes to ballot paper security arrangements before an election raise a public-interest concern because any weaknesses may be difficult to reverse once the papers have been printed and distributed.
The petition, however, does not allege that the IEBC intends to facilitate electoral malpractice or that ballot papers have already been compromised. Instead, the party says its challenge is intended to secure accountability before the disputed changes are implemented.
“We are demanding preventive accountability before potentially consequential decisions become irreversible,” NRA secretary-general Amemba Magufuli said.
The party wants the court to review and quash the disputed relaxations to the extent that they are unlawful, preserve the original security specifications and require an objective, independent technical assessment before the revised requirements are implemented without proof of equivalent or superior protection.
It argues that the simultaneous relaxation of several security features should not be treated as a series of isolated technical adjustments, but assessed collectively to establish their effect on the integrity of ballot papers.
The NRA says the IEBC should provide credible technical evidence demonstrating that the revised specifications adequately protect electoral materials and preserve public confidence in the electoral process.
At the centre of the case is whether the commission can lawfully relax previously prescribed mandatory security requirements without demonstrating that the changes will maintain the constitutional standards governing the conduct of elections.
