A red card raised at a soccer match, symbolizing Red Card Kenya, an organization comprised of four Kenyan civil society groups, which named 20 candidates unfit to run for elections in a recent report — © 2010 Reuters

Can Kenya codify “integrity”? That question is at the heart of a vigorous debate in Kenya, one sparked by suggestions that at least 20 people running for election in the August polls may be in violation of constitutional requirements of “integrity.”

Red Card Kenya, comprised of four Kenyan civil society groups, started the debate with a report naming 20 candidates who they allege may not be fit for office by virtue of violating Chapter 6 of the Constitution on Leadership and Integrity.

Chapter 6 vaguely stipulates what “a leader with integrity” is, and outlines standards, including conduct, financial probity and other responsibilities. While many support these provisions in general, a heated debate has broken out over the question of whether “integrity” is an appropriate bar for candidates, if so, how precisely it should be legally defined and practically applied.

The conduct flagged by Red Card Kenya is very serious, ranging from criminal charges of robbery and rape, to mismanagement and embezzlement of funds, to incitement to violence through hate speech.

As a basic human right, in principle, every interested and eligible adult citizen should be able to stand for election. Any exclusion of any individual from an election must be set out clearly in law, based on objective criteria and used only in the most serious of cases. Anyone banned should have a right to appeal decisions, otherwise the power to ban a candidate could become arbitrary or politically-motivated.

Article 19(1) of Kenya’s Constitution states that the purpose of recognising and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms is to preserve the dignity of the individual and communities and to promote social justice and the realization of the potential of all human beings. Chapter 6 was therefore supposed to signal a shift in Kenyan politics towards greater respect for the dignity for citizens. Protecting and preserving the human rights and dignity of the citizens should begin with the leaders who have been entrusted to hold public office on their behalf.

To date Kenya’ Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) – which oversees elections – has been silent on Red Card’s criticisms. As the final arbiter of electoral eligibility and one of the core constitutional institutions established to protect the constitution, the IEBC should explain how it is applying the constitutional requirement of “integrity” as it determines eligibility.

At the same time, accountability is not only a matter for the ballot box. Accountability for the alleged crimes and abuses Red Card raises should be matters for the courts to efficiently handle, both before and after election day.