On voting day, the queues are always long. People stand patiently, chatting in low tones, but if you listen carefully, one phrase keeps coming up: “I’ll vote for our person.” It sounds simple, but it says a lot. In many cases, the decision has already been made—not based on policies, but identity. Political analyst Peter Kagwanja once described this clearly when he said, “Elections in Africa often resemble ethnic censuses rather than contests of ideas.” That reality quietly shapes how democracy works on the ground.
Kenya knows too well what can happen when voting follows tribal lines. During the 2007 Kenyan general election, communities voted in blocs, and when results were disputed, the situation quickly turned violent. Neighbors became enemies almost overnight. According to Michael Bratton, “Ethnicity remains a powerful predictor of vote choice in many African elections.” His colleague Mwangi S. Kimenyi also noted that economic issues mattered, but identity often came first. The turning point came when Kofi Annan stepped in to mediate. His efforts led to a power-sharing agreement—proof that even deep political crises can be managed when leaders choose dialogue over division.
One of the biggest problems with tribal voting is the kind of leadership it produces. When people vote based on “who is ours,” they sometimes ignore competence. PLO Lumumba has warned about this repeatedly, saying, “Leadership must never be reduced to ethnic arithmetic; it must be about integrity and service.” Without that, public resources can end up being distributed unfairly. Some regions grow faster, while others are left behind. Kenya tried to address this through devolution under the Constitution of Kenya 2010. In counties like Makueni, devolved funds have improved healthcare and water access—showing that sharing power locally can reduce the pressure of tribal politics at the national level.
Corruption is another issue tied closely to tribal voting. Leaders who rely on ethnic support may feel protected from criticism. Political scientist Nic Cheeseman explains this by saying, “When voters prioritize identity over performance, accountability weakens.” You begin to see systems where jobs, tenders, and opportunities are given based on connections instead of merit. Kenya has tried to respond through institutions like the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission, which investigates misuse of public funds. While it’s not perfect, it has at least created more public awareness and pressure for accountability.
Tribal politics also creates division that lasts beyond elections. Politicians sometimes use language that creates fear—suggesting that one group will dominate others. Mutahi Ngunyi has openly said, “Ethnicity is the most powerful mobilization tool in Kenyan politics.” The problem is that once these divisions are created, they don’t disappear easily. To counter this, institutions like the National Cohesion and Integration Commission have worked to promote peace and monitor hate speech. During the 2013 and 2017 elections, peace campaigns helped reduce large-scale violence, showing that change is possible.
Another growing problem is misinformation, especially on social media. False messages spread quickly, often targeting specific communities. Media scholar Herman Wasserman warns that “media can either inflame divisions or help build democratic culture.” In Kenya, efforts like fact-checking initiatives and peace journalism have helped reduce the spread of dangerous propaganda during elections. It’s a reminder that information itself can shape how people vote.
Looking beyond Kenya, there are examples of how countries have tried to solve similar problems. After the Rwandan genocide, Rwanda took strong steps to reduce ethnic identity in politics. Mahmood Mamdani explains that “the state deliberately shifted focus from ethnic identity to national unity.” Today, while debates about the system continue, ethnic-based political conflict has significantly reduced. In Nigeria, the federal character principle was introduced to ensure that different ethnic groups are represented in government, helping reduce feelings of exclusion.
South Africa offers another powerful example. After Apartheid, the country faced deep divisions. But leadership under Nelson Mandela focused on unity. Mandela once said, “We must learn to live together as a united people, for reconciliation is not a choice—it is a necessity.” Through reconciliation efforts, the country avoided falling into revenge politics and created a more inclusive political environment.
So, what can be done moving forward? First, civic education is critical. People need to understand why policies matter more than identity. Second, development must be fair—when communities feel included, they are less likely to depend on tribal loyalty. Third, institutions must remain strong and independent. And finally, leadership must change. As Barack Obama once said, “Africa doesn’t need strong men, it needs strong institutions.”
At the end of the day, tribal voting is not something that disappears overnight. It is rooted in history, identity, and even survival. But change begins with awareness. The moment voters start asking “What can this leader do?” instead of “Where does this leader come from?” is the moment democracy starts to grow stronger.
And maybe then, those long queues on voting day will not just represent participation—but real progress.
