As East Africa emerges from a charged election cycle in Uganda and Tanzania, the region is confronted with an uncomfortable truth: elections are increasingly being shaped not at the ballot box, but through control of institutions, information, and security long before citizens cast their votes.
Uganda’s recent election, which returned President Yoweri Museveni for a 7th term, extending his 40-year reign, was marked by internet disruptions, restrictions on opposition mobilisation, and serious allegations of intimidation. Tanzania’s polls, which have ended much more violently, revealed a similar pattern: a dominant ruling party, a constrained opposition, and the use of state machinery to manage both participation and narrative.
For Kenya, these developments are not distant concerns. They offer clear lessons and warnings as the country looks toward the 2027 General Election.
The Real Battle Is Before Polling Day
One striking regional pattern is that electoral outcomes are increasingly determined well before the election day. Legal technicalities, regulatory hurdles, and administrative discretion have become powerful tools for shaping who participates, how campaigns unfold, and what voters ultimately see.
Both countries have adopted covert acts of general intimidation of the population and opposition political parties and candidates. Through abduction of political activists and creation of a terse and intimidating political environment, the stage is set, and the outcome is both controlled and pre-determined.
The stage in Tanzania was set by the arrest and prosecution of CHADEMA chairperson Tundu Lissu on treason charges, followed by the High Court’s ban on the party’s political activity due to allegations of disproportionate use of party resources. The party later boycotted the general elections, citing the government’s failure to implement the proposed electoral reforms. In Uganda, a similar pattern of escalating grievance, repression, and unrest was created through the deployment of state machinery to suppress opposition. Incidents of interference in opposition campaigns through the use of tactics such as breaking up opposition rallies and the prevention of opposition funding, as well as the limitation of access to local and international media, have been rampant.
Kenya must therefore be vigilant about the integrity of its pre-election processes. The operational independence of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) will be pivotal. Any perception of political capture, whether through appointments, procurement, or selective rule enforcement, risks undermining public trust long before ballots are printed.
Security Agencies and the Politics of “Order”
Uganda and Tanzania illustrate how security agencies can drift from neutral enforcers of public order into political actors. The denial of rally permits, selective arrests, and heavy-handed crowd control, all justified under the banner of security, have become familiar features in the region.
Also Read: Uganda Shuts Down Internet
Kenya’s history shows how dangerous this path can be. As 2027 approaches, the National Police Service must be seen to operate under clear, neutral, and publicly articulated rules. Oversight bodies such as IPOA must be empowered to act swiftly and visibly, not retrospectively. Stability cannot be purchased at the expense of constitutional rights.
The New Frontier: Information Control
Perhaps the most worrying regional trend is the normalisation of information control during elections. Internet shutdowns, throttling, platform-specific restrictions, and pressure on media houses have been justified as tools against misinformation or unrest.
The control and suppression of information and communication tools violates the right to freedom of information and completely locks out the world from seeing what is going on in the country.
To date, noone can speak clearly about the situation in Tanzania.
For Kenya, a country whose elections rely heavily on digital transmission, real-time media reporting, and online civic engagement, such measures would be deeply destabilising. Transparency thrives on connectivity. Any attempt to interfere with access to information, even temporarily, risks breeding suspicion, panic, and misinformation.
Strong legal safeguards must therefore exist to limit executive discretion over internet access and media operations during elections.
After the Vote: Stability Versus Accountability
Post-election periods in the region increasingly reveal a troubling trade-off: stability is prioritised while accountability is deferred or abandoned. Protests are framed as threats, grievances are dismissed, and political settlements are reached without addressing underlying flaws.
Kenya must resist this temptation. A peaceful outcome is important, but legitimacy is enduring. Electoral justice mechanisms, judicial independence, and the right to peaceful dissent are not obstacles to stability; they are its foundation.
A Narrow but Crucial Window
Kenya still holds a comparative advantage in democratic governance in the region: a robust Constitution, an active judiciary, a free press, and an engaged civil society. But these strengths are not self-sustaining.
Also Read: Museveni Secures Seventh Term with Landslide Victory
The experiences of Uganda and Tanzania show that democratic erosion is rarely sudden. It happens incrementally, through convenience, fatigue, and the quiet normalisation of exceptional measures.
As 2027 draws closer, Kenya’s leaders, institutions, and citizens must recognise that the greatest threat is not chaos, but complacency.
The integrity of Kenya’s next election will be decided not on election day, but by the choices made in the years and months leading up to it.
This article was written by Zakayo Alakonya, Managing Partner, Alakonya Law LLP.
Follow our WhatsApp Channel and X Account for real-time news updates.
