Referendum Baseline Public Opinion Poll July 2010

1. Referendum Baseline Public Opinion PollJuly 2010 Date Published: 23rd July 2010

2. Methodology

3. Objective of the Survey The objective of the survey was to assess voters’ views on issues regarding the draft constitution including: sources of information about it, the position of religious leaders, and possible violence. The results should contribute to a deeper understanding of the processes of public opinion formation and decision-making by ordinary Kenyans and inform responses to challenges in the post-referendum environment.

4. Poll Methodology Dates of polling July 11th – July 17th 6005 respondents Sample Size Sampling methodology Random, Multi-stage stratified using PPS Recently registered voters by IIEC Universe Structured Face-to-Face interviews at the household level Data collection methodology Sampling error +/-1.6 with a 95% confidence level

5. Sample Distribution

6. Familiarity with the proposed Draft

7. “Have you checked the Voters’ register to make sure your name is there?” By Total Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

8. “Are you planning to go and vote?” By Total Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

9. Motivation for voting: By Total Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

10. Motivation for voting: By ‘Yes’ voters Base: ‘YES’ Voters (All Respondents)

11. Motivation for voting: By ‘No’ voters Base: ‘NO’ Voters’(All Respondents)

12. “How much do you know about the draft constitution?” By Total Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

13. “How much do you know about the draft constitution?” By Gender & Setting Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

14. “How much do you know about the draft constitution?” By Province Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

15. “From which sources have you learnt something about the proposed constitution?” Base: n=5979 (Those who know at least something about the constitution)

16. Usefulness of main sources of information: By much/only some information. Base: By those with two or more sources of information.

17. “Would you say the information you obtained was balanced to both sides or biased?” (Base: Those who attended a workshop/forum)

18. Views on the draft

19. “When a referendum is held in August this year, will you vote YES to approve or NO to reject the draft constitution?” Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

20. “When a referendum is held in August this year, will you vote YES to approve or NO to reject the draft constitution?” Base: those who have made up their minds

21. Reasons why you would vote against the proposed constitution Base: n=1321 (those will vote NO)

22. “Do you/your family have anxieties about the security of your land if the draft constitution is ratified?” By Total and Province (Base = those who own land)

23. Support for the draft by the level of familiarity % Indicating will vote ‘yes to approve’ Base: those indicated will vote Yes to approve

24. Support for the draft by support for political personalities and political parties

25. “If Presidential elections were held today, who would you vote for if that person was a presidential candidate?” Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

26. Support for the draft by political personalities followers. Base: Supporters of each personality

27. “Which political party do you feel closest to?” Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

28. Support for the draft by political parties followers. Base: Supporters of each Party

29. Support for the draft by Provinces. Base: Supporters of each Party

30. Religious leaders and the draft

31. “Should religious leaders take sides, either “YES” or “No” on the constitutional referendum?” Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

32. “Have your religious leaders taken sides on the Draft Constitution, whether ‘Yes’ or ‘No’?” Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

33. “Which side is your LOCAL religious leadership supporting?” Base: n=3434 (Those who know that their religious leaders have taken a position)

34. Voters’ intentions in relation to their local religious leaders’ position

35. Present Occurrence and Future Concerns of Violence

36. “How likely do you think there will be violence in your locality related to the campaigns for an against the draft constitution?” By Total, Province Base: n=6005 (All Respondents)

37. Some current affairs issues

38. “Do you support the proposed increase in salaries and benefits for MPs?” By Total

39. “Do you support the price control bill passed by MPs?” By Total

40. Useful Illustrations

41. Geographical distribution of ‘Yes’ and ‘No”

42. Regional profile of ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ Share of the ‘YES’ support by province Share of the ‘NO’ support by province

43. Assumptions • The results of this opinion poll assume: • That there will be equal voter turnout from both the ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ side • That there will be no significant change in political alliances before the referendum • That once the undecided group finally make up their minds, their support will distribute equally between the ‘NO’ and ‘YES’ side. • That the electoral process will be accurately reflect the voting behaviour

44. Some Key observations • There is notable high level of confidence in this democratic process as demonstrated by the high levels of desire to turnout and vote. • Further, voters are motivated to turn out and vote by the high desire for better governance and need to excise ones democratic right by way of voting for/against that what they feel best for themselves and the country • We also report significantly high levels of voters card validation- which is a clear response to messages by the IIEC. • The diminishing levels of indecisiveness and increase levels of supporters following their respective political leaders position is a clear demonstration of the impact of the ongoing campaigns. • Further, the ongoing civic education and campaigns have increased levels of familiarity with proposed constitution • There are notable levels of cohesion and tolerance as demonstrated by the very low levels of tensions or predictions of violence. • The voters are also fairly tolerant of the religious leaders taking positions which do not necessarily match their own • finally, the yes side has a clear majority, in fact, based on those who have made up their mind nearly three quarters would vote in favour of the proposed draft.

45. Poll Methodology The target population for this survey was all Kenyans who have recently registered with the IIEC as voters. A sample size of 6005 respondents was drawn and distributed across the country based on the voters register by regions as per the IIEC. The sample was distributed across 71 districts. The maximum margin of error attributed to sampling and other random effects of this poll’s sample size is +/- 1.6 % margin at 95% confidence level. A randomized multi-stage stratified design using probability proportional to size (PPS) was used. This ensured that districts with a higher voter population size had a proportionately higher sample size allocation. The interviews were done face to face at household level. Household interviews were preferred because they allow for pure random sampling ensuring full representation of the various demographics and also for quality control. These face-to-face in-home interviews are also preferred because they allowed for further probing as respondents have more time to respond to questions . The households were selected using the systematic random sampling procedure. In this case a random starting point was selected within a cluster of households. From that point the interviewers mainly skipped 4 households until the sample size for that cluster in the district was achieved. One eligible respondent was then selected from each qualifying household through a household member randomization technique known as the Kish Grid. This was done to ensure that there was no bias related to household member selection. The data collection involved the use of a semi-structured questionnaire having both open and closed ended questions. The poll questions were structured in a very open manner, with all possible options provided, including no opinion. This ensures that there is no bias at all with the way the questions are asked. Strict quality control measures for data collection were applied. The fieldwork Supervisors made a minimum of 15% on-site back checks and accompanied a minimum of 10% of all interviewers’ calls, while the field managers made 2% back-checks. These back-checks were made within the same day of interviewing

46. For further details Please contact: George Waititu Tel: + 254 20 4450 196 Mobile: +254 722206980 George.waititu@synovate .com