Kenya 2017 Presidential Election and Fresh Election
August 8, 2017 – October 26, 2017
Kenya's Supreme Court annulled the declared 8 August presidential result because the election was not conducted in accordance with the Constitution and law and the result process was not sufficiently transparent or verifiable. A fresh election followed on 26 October after Raila Odinga withdrew and called a boycott; turnout fell sharply and voting did not take place in 25 constituencies amid insecurity. The Court dismissed later petitions and upheld Uhuru Kenyatta's fresh-election victory. This case separates invalid administration from proof of a different numerical winner: the first judgment voided the process, not by declaring an alternative tally.
Official results
Declared 8 August result — annulled by the Supreme Court
- Uhuru Kenyatta54.3%8,203,290
Declaration invalidated; not a legally operative result
- Raila Odinga44.7%6,762,224
Fresh presidential election, 26 October
- Uhuru Kenyatta98.3%7,483,895
Election upheld by the Supreme Court
- Raila Odinga1%73,228
Withdrew and called for a boycott; remained on the ballot
The Integrity Ledger
What the evidence establishes, and what it does not — side by side, each finding sourced and tiered.
What is established
- Process violationsConfirmed
The 8 August presidential election failed the constitutional and legal standard for a transparent and verifiable result.
More detail
The Supreme Court held by majority that IEBC did not conduct the election in accordance with the Constitution and applicable law. Its orders invalidated the declared result, invalidated Kenyatta's declaration as president-elect and required a fresh election within 60 days. The ruling rested on the integrity of the process and results transmission, not on naming a different winner.
Sources:1 - Process violationsCorroborated
The fresh election took place in a coercive, polarized environment with an opposition boycott, serious violence and no polling in 25 constituencies.
More detail
The Carter Center limited its deployment because of insecurity, recorded that opposition leader Raila Odinga boycotted the vote, and described violence concentrated in opposition-leaning areas. These conditions explain both the incomplete geographic polling and the collapse in turnout.
What is not established
- Result falsificationContested
The annulment did not establish that Raila Odinga had received more votes than Uhuru Kenyatta.
More detail
The Court declared the election and Kenyatta's declaration invalid because the process did not satisfy constitutional and legal requirements. It did not substitute a corrected national tally or declare Odinga the numerical winner. Treating the judgment as proof of a reversed vote count goes beyond its orders.
Sources:1 - Result falsificationDebunked
The legal challenges did not invalidate the 26 October fresh-election result.
More detail
The Supreme Court dismissed both consolidated petitions and expressly upheld the fresh presidential election and Kenyatta's election. This resolves the legal validity of the declared rerun result; it does not erase the documented boycott, violence or low participation.
Sources:1
Process assessment
The August vote is a landmark example of a court remedy based on procedural integrity: an election can be invalid even without a judicially reconstructed alternative tally. The fresh vote repaired the legal vacancy but did not restore broad political participation; it proceeded after an opposition boycott and under severe security constraints. Judicial review ultimately upheld that second process.