By Kepher Otieno - Reporter
Kenya, 24 December 2025 - Prime Cabinet Secretary Musalia Mudavadi’s proposal that Kenya to hold a constitutional referendum alongside the 2027 general election signals a renewed push to resolve long-standing governance disputes that have repeatedly strained the country’s political system.
Framed as a pragmatic and cost-effective solution, the idea seeks to harness an already high-stakes electoral moment to settle issues Parliament and the courts have struggled to conclusively address.
Mudavadi argues that unresolved constitutional questions—ranging from inclusivity in governance to the future of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) and the elusive two-thirds gender rule—have kept Kenya in a perpetual cycle of political contestation.
By packaging these matters into a limited number of clearly framed referendum questions, he believes Kenyans can give a direct mandate, reducing post-election bargaining and litigation.
At the centre of his argument is the National Dialogue Committee (NADCO) report, which was meant to ease political tensions following recent unrest.
While Parliament was tasked with implementing its recommendations, Mudavadi suggests the slow progress and political back-and-forth expose the limits of legislative solutions.
A referendum, in his view, would transfer authority from political institutions to the electorate, lending legitimacy and finality to contentious reforms such as the possible creation of a substantive prime minister’s post.
The proposal also reflects Mudavadi’s broader reading of Kenya’s democratic maturity.
He contends that voters are capable of handling multiple decisions on a single election day, pointing out that Kenyans already elect several leaders simultaneously.
Adding a few constitutional questions, he argues, would not overburden voters or significantly increase costs, especially if managed by the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) as a parallel exercise.
Politically, the idea positions Mudavadi as a consensus-builder within the current administration—someone seeking to stabilise governance by institutionalising compromise rather than renegotiating power after every election.
More from Kenya
His reference to Kenya’s Supreme Court nullification of a presidential election underscores an appeal to Kenya’s reputation as a democratic trailblazer in Africa, suggesting a successful election-referendum combo could once again set a continental precedent.
However, the proposal is not without risks.
Referendums in Kenya have historically been polarising, often becoming proxies for broader political rivalries rather than focused constitutional debates.
Folding such a process into a general election could heighten tensions, particularly if referendum questions are perceived as favouring certain political actors or power blocs.
There are also practical concerns. While Mudavadi downplays cost implications, the credibility of the IEBC, voter education, and clarity of questions will be critical.
Poorly framed issues or inadequate public participation could undermine the very legitimacy the referendum is meant to provide.
Mudavadi’s call opens an early conversation about how Kenya approaches constitutional reform.
By pushing the debate into the public arena ahead of 2027, he is testing whether Kenyans are ready to trade prolonged political negotiation for a one-time, decisive popular vote.
Whether the idea gains traction will depend not only on its technical feasibility, but on the political will to let the electorate, rather than elite bargaining, have the final say.
