A company that has challenged the multibillion-shilling tender for technology to be used in next year’s General Election has claimed the electoral commission designed the procurement process to favour a South Korean firm.
Galadirel Investment Limited told the Public Procurement Administrative Review Board (PPARB) that the requirements in the tender for the Integrated Elections Management System (IEMS) and related hardware appear to mirror the experience, capacity and past achievements of Miru Systems, a South Korean election technology company.
The Kenyan company is seeking to halt the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) 's procurement, arguing that the tender is discriminatory, flawed, and violates constitutional and statutory procurement requirements.
The contested tender is one of two major international procurements floated by IEBC in preparation for the 2027 General Election.
It covers the Integrated Elections Management System and associated hardware that will support the Kenya Integrated Elections Management System (KIEMS) kits used for biometric voter registration, identification and transmission of election results.
A separate tender covers the printing of ballot papers, tactile ballot folders for visually impaired voters, the Register of Voters and statutory election forms.
Appearing before the board chaired by Alice Oeri, Galadirel Investments Ltd, through lawyers David Musyoka and Julius Miiri, argued that the tender document contains restrictive requirements that effectively lock out potential competitors.
Among the conditions challenged by the company is a requirement that bidders to demonstrate at least five years’ experience in supplying election technology, devices, hardware and accessories.
The tender also requires bidders to show they have undertaken at least one election technology contract worth $50 million (Sh6.5 billion) or more between 2021 and 2025 and supplied at least 50,000 devices to a single client during the same period.
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission chair Erastus Edung (center) flanked by fellow commissioners address the media at the commission offices in Nairobi on January 27, 2026.
Photo credit: Francis Nderitu | Nation Media Group
Mr Miiri argued that the requirements appear to have been crafted around the profile of Miru Systems.
“It is the applicant’s case that the specifications mirror the achievements Miru Systems has attained in previous tenders,” he submitted.
IEBC, however, dismissed the allegations and maintained that it had to go for the best given the sensitivity and the magnitude of the General Election.
“The respondents deny the allegation that the specifications contained in the tender document were tailored, directly or indirectly, in favour of Miru Systems Limited,” the commission stated.
The electoral body further objected to the repeated references to the Korean company, noting that it was not a party to the proceedings.
“It is procedurally unfair and contrary to the principles of natural justice to make adverse allegations against a third party and invite the tribunal to make findings that may affect that party’s interests without first affording it an opportunity to be heard,” IEBC argued.
According to Mr Miiri, concerns about the Korean firm were heightened by reports that the company had participated in elections in the Democratic Republic of Congo in 2024, where the electoral process was allegedly plagued by challenges.
He argued that the tender document contains vague, incomplete and undefined technical specifications that make it difficult for prospective bidders to determine the standards against which their bids will be evaluated.
The firm also challenged the requirement for bidders to provide a tender security of Sh30 million, arguing that IEBC had failed to disclose the estimated value of the procurement.
Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission polling official holds a Kenya Integrated Elections Management System kits at Ol Kalou PCEA Church on July 13, 2026; during a sensitization programme.
Photo credit: Boniface Mwangi | Nation Media Group
According to Galadirel, Section 61 of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act requires sufficient information to justify the tender security amount.
“The tender document is contrary to Section 61(2)(c) of the PPADA as it does not contain a disclosed budget that justifies that the provided security of Sh30 million is the statutory two percent of the tender as valued by the respondent,” the company argued.
Galadirel further claimed that the tender permits bidders to quote prices in foreign currencies but fails to provide a clear currency conversion mechanism, creating uncertainty during financial evaluation.
“The absence of a clearly prescribed currency conversion rate, date and methodology creates a real possibility of inconsistent calculation and unequal treatment of tenderers,” Mr Miiri submitted.
The company maintained that the procurement document does not adequately disclose compatibility, interoperability and integration requirements between existing election technology and the systems being procured.
It argued that the omissions and ambiguities could affect competition, evaluation and equal treatment of bidders.
IEBC, however, dismissed the claims and urged the board to strike out the case. Lawyers Edwin Mukele and Moses Kipkogei described the case as premature, speculative and incompetent.
Mr Mukele argued that Galadirel had not sought clarification from the electoral body before moving to the procurement watchdog despite regulations providing a mechanism for bidders to raise concerns over tender documents.
IEBC maintained that the omission was significant because bidders were entitled to seek explanations in writing at least eight days before the tender closing date.
“The applicant has not placed any evidence before this board to demonstrate that prior to filing the request for review it requested clarification from the respondent in respect of the provisions which it alleges are ambiguous, inconsistent or unclear,” Mr Mukele submitted.
An IEBC official displays a KIEMS kit during a simulation process in the past.
Photo credit: File | Nation
He argued that the orders sought would effectively require the board to rewrite the tender document, a role that falls outside its jurisdiction.
Mr Kipkogei told the board that the commission could not speak on behalf of Miru Systems and did not even know whether the company intended to bid.
“Whether they will even participate in the tender, we do not know. Whether it bungled elections elsewhere we do not know. It is not a party in the case,” he said.
The commission defended the experience and technical requirements, saying they were necessary given the sensitivity of elections and the scale of the technology required.
“Elections in the country are emotive, hence the reason we demand the best,” Mr Kipkogei said.
IEBC also noted that the tender includes measures aimed at promoting local participation, including a requirement that the successful bidder implement a 40 percent local content plan through technology transfer and engagement of Kenyan suppliers.
The commission said market research had shown that no local entity currently possesses the capacity to independently develop and deliver election technology of the scale and sophistication required for the national exercise.
The board is expected to determine whether the procurement process complies with public procurement law and whether the challenged requirements unfairly restrict competition ahead of one of the country’s most critical electoral procurements.
