NAIROBI, Kenya, Oct 12 – The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) is facing a court challenge over changes to ballot paper security specifications for the 2027 General Election, with the National Reconstruction Alliance (NRA) Party seeking to block implementation of the revised requirements.
In a petition filed at the High Court in Nairobi, the party challenges an IEBC decision to relax several security features in a tender for ballot papers and other election materials, arguing that the changes could weaken safeguards against counterfeiting and undermine the verifiability of the electoral process.
The dispute centers on Addendum No. 3, issued on September 17, 2026, for Tender No. IEBC/OIT/02/2026–2027, which covers the supply of ballot papers, tactile folders, the register of voters and statutory election result declaration forms under a three-year framework contract.
The party says the original tender required variable-data guilloche patterns, variable micro-text, multi-colored tapered serialization and metallic foil stamping, among other specifications.
However, the revised requirements permit single-color black serialization, static guilloche patterns and static micro-text, while allowing blind embossing without metallic foil stamping.
The changes were described in the addendum as a “technical relaxation to optimize cost and timelines,” according to the court documents.
“The issue before the Court is whether the Respondents were lawfully entitled to remove or materially reduce particular layers of security previously prescribed as mandatory, and whether the remaining safeguards provide an equivalent level of security and verifiability,” the petition states.
The NRA wants the court to suspend implementation of the revised specifications and restrain the commission from procuring, printing, accepting delivery of or distributing ballot papers produced under the relaxed requirements pending determination of the case.
It is also seeking orders compelling the IEBC to retain the original specifications unless an objective and independent technical assessment establishes that alternative features offer equivalent or stronger protection.
The party argues that the changes must be assessed collectively rather than individually, warning that reducing several security layers could affect the ability to detect imitation, duplication, substitution or unauthorized reproduction of ballot papers.
The petition, however, acknowledges that the revised tender retains other safeguards, including custom watermarks, embedded ultraviolet security elements, anti-copy backgrounds and anti-duplication QR codes.
The party says its case is not based on an allegation that the commission intends to facilitate electoral malpractice, but on whether the revised specifications adequately protect the authenticity and integrity of election materials.
“The Petitioner does not allege, and this Affidavit should not be construed as alleging, that the Respondents have an intention to facilitate electoral malpractice or compromise the electoral process.”
The legal challenge places the commission’s procurement decisions under scrutiny ahead of the next General Election, with the party arguing that cost efficiency and production timelines should not override constitutional requirements for secure, transparent and verifiable elections.
The petition cites Articles 81 and 86 of the Constitution, which set out principles governing free and fair elections and require voting systems to be secure, accurate, transparent and accountable. It also raises questions under Article 227, which requires public procurement to be fair, transparent, competitive and cost-effective.
The party further argues that Section 75 of the Public Procurement and Asset Disposal Act limits amendments to tender documents where they materially alter the substance of the original tender.
