The recent adoption of amendments to the Football Kenya Federation (FKF) Electoral Code on 24th August 2024 has reignited concerns about the transparency and fairness of upcoming FKF elections. While the FKF leadership may hail these changes as necessary, a closer inspection reveals troubling implications that could undermine the very democratic process they are meant to uphold.

These amendments stem from the 2020 ruling by the Sports Dispute Tribunal (SDT) in Tribunal Case No. 3 & 5. The SDT had declared sections of the original 2019/2020 Electoral Code as invalid, specifically criticizing the eligibility criteria that were seen as mechanisms to block viable candidates and clear the path for a predetermined favorite. In an attempt to address these issues, the FKF Electoral Board implemented new guidelines in August 2020, but the latest amendments seem to exacerbate the very problems the SDT sought to resolve.

Where did the Electoral Board’s mandate come from?

At the heart of the controversy is Section 4(2) of the newly amended code, which explicitly states that the FKF Electoral Board has no authority to impose any eligibility criteria that are not already provided for in the FKF Constitution. Yet, the recent changes grant the board a level of discretion that is not only questionable but also potentially unconstitutional. If the board itself cannot create new criteria, where does it derive the power to alter the eligibility rules? This glaring contradiction has left many members puzzled and concerned.

It is worth noting that the Sports Dispute Tribunal did not officially adopt these amendments, contrary to claims made by some within the FKF leadership. This misrepresentation has further fueled suspicions that the changes were made to serve a narrow interest rather than ensure a free and open electoral process.

The General Secretary’s expanded role is a red flag

Equally concerning is the expanded role of the FKF General Secretary in the election process. The amended code gives the General Secretary, a position already deeply embedded in the federation’s day-to-day operations, undue influence over the conduct of elections. For example, Section 3(1)(c) allows the General Secretary to attend board meetings, albeit in an advisory capacity, while Section 6(c) entrusts them with handling ballot papers post-election.

ALSO READ: Richard Ngichabe Binga Elected New Chairperson Of Kenya Karate Federation

Such provisions cast doubt on the impartiality of the election process. The FKF General Secretary, who is closely aligned with the current administration, should not have such a significant hand in the mechanics of elections. Elections, after all, are meant to be conducted by independent bodies, not by insiders with vested interests in the outcome.

The blurred lines between FKF’s administrative structure and its Electoral Board are further highlighted by the fact that the board shares the same headquarters as the FKF. Although Section 3(1)(g) of the code allows the board to choose a different location, the failure to do so only intensifies concerns that the board lacks the necessary autonomy to conduct fair and credible elections.

Is this code fit for purpose?

The FKF Constitution, Article 27, and the Kenyan Constitution’s Article 81 are clear on the principles of free, fair, and transparent elections. Yet, the current amendments to the FKF Electoral Code fail to meet these standards. The increased role of the General Secretary, coupled with the questionable powers of the Electoral Board, casts a long shadow over the federation’s commitment to democratic values.

As Kenya’s football governing body, FKF should be setting an example in governance and integrity. However, with these changes, one can’t help but wonder if we are witnessing a well-intentioned reform or a thinly veiled attempt to control the election outcome.

While the amendments to the FKF Electoral Code may have been presented as a step towards rectifying past wrongs, they seem to raise more questions than answers. If these issues are not addressed, the upcoming FKF elections risk being marred by controversy and may lack the credibility required to move Kenyan football forward. The FKF leadership must ensure that the electoral process is transparent, free from bias, and reflective of the values enshrined in both the FKF and Kenyan constitutions.