When the Greeks settled on a popular model of choosing their leaders, they believed that the demos would through the Kratia produce acceptable leaders who would exercise their powers responsibly for the benefit and progress of their nation-states. 

The democratic process would overtime establish its core pillars as it spread across the world, breathing fresh air into hitherto conservative and traditionalistic models which included monarchies and age-old theocracies that were prevalent in the Middle Ages. 

A key pillar and feature of this so-called democratic process was the holding of regular, free and fair elections. In 2024 alone, the so-called super election year, over 70 countries in the world held elections with over 3 billion people (nearly half of the world’s population) participating in the process. 

Africa and Kenya have not been left behind in the election agenda. Since the end of slavery, the advent of colonialism and the dawn of independence, western democracy and its attendant features have been gradually adopted on the continent.

Kenya, for instance, held its first election under the colonial administration in 1920 and has gone through 26 election cycles (12 before independence and 14 thereafter). 

In their ideal form and guided by the democratic principles of credibility, freedom and fairness, elections are supposed to be the medium through which the electorate (who are part of the governed) get an opportunity to choose their preferred leadership that goes on to take up public governance roles and responsibilities over a prescribed period of time. 

The question foremost in many people’s minds has been whether all these elections have gone on to serve their purpose; the choice of leaders who best represented the electorate and the general public on governance and leadership. 

Bad leadership and poor returns on the election investment, disputes, fraud, violence and death during and after polls collude to deny the people their deliverables. Is this right? Is the election required to deliver only numbers, ballots, incidents and non-disputed results? 

Given the overall purpose of elections in the wider scheme of the democratic experience, we need to re-center this critical pillar to deliver for the people. 

The first call is to address the miseducation of the voter. 

In Kenya, there is a serious schism between why the people elect and why the candidates get elected. 

While the general driver of the people is progress and development, the conspiring political class only gets into the elections looking for opportunities for self-aggrandizement.  It is a known fact that one of the ways to make it in the country is to get a political seat and all else follows. 

This has not been challenged by the electorate, because it is imagined that the ones in the know (and should be the leaders) must be the ones who want to make it. In simpler terms, the more ambitious, the more aggressive in seeking leadership and the more monied (indications of making it) the more the likelihood of winning an election. 

Recent studies have gone on to confirm the money issue. Winning possibilities are greatly enhanced the more you spend. Robust voter and political education are required to liberate the voter from this kind of spell and kasumba. 

The second issue is the vetting of candidates who offer themselves for office. Ideally, this should be a long and thorough interrogation. 

Given the five-year election cycle, citizens should continuously vet their leaders and potential leaders through scrutinizing their values and actions, and questioning their understanding and responsiveness to community needs and emerging issues. Opportunities for community engagement should be used to determine candidates’ suitability, and result in the community deciding who is fit for leadership as opposed to individuals imposing themselves on communities out of self interest. 

Lastly, a clear framework based on the manifestoes rendered by candidates should be used to ensure accountability.  The greatest success of the June 2024 Gen Z protests in my view was the opportunity they created by ‘greeting’ public leaders. 

These infamous greetings should be part of the tools deployed to ensure accountability. And they don’t have to be violent. A vigilant and active citizenry can keep elected leaders in check by tracking every action and scoring against the electoral promises made and the needs and interest of the community. 

These processes, if firmed up, have the capacity to produce good leaders as a by-product. The act of greeting leaders for instance will save communities the arduous pre-election task of identifying good leaders since the exercise will already be realized in the course of these ‘greeting’ campaigns, where good leaders will come out on top while unfit ones will fall by the wayside.

Re-centering elections as a central pillar to democratic governance requires an informed, active and engaged citizen. 

The actual event of voting eventually just formalizes a localized interactive process that should have gone full circle in the village alleys, local public spaces and barazas of the target community. 

We also have good and tested leaders from chamas, student bodies, resident associations, sports groups and market leaders.  Let us use these spaces to breed a new service-driven and visionary leadership. 

As the country gears up for another election in the coming year, it should be already clear for all those who intend to participate in the process, who the right leaders are.