
A wise man of the ancient once said " when I was a child, I did childish things. Now that I am a man, I have put away the childish and act like a man". I was in Kenya about a month ago, and during my visit two interesting events occurred. These were the live telecast of parliamentary proceedings and the verdict on the Tom Cholmondeley Delamere case.
These were both significant events in the history of the country, one heralding a new era of openness and maturity for the Kenyan society. While the other displaying our inability to deal with an old era, and its resulting diversity. We focused our attention on the narrow prism with which every Kenyan seems to define self, by - race, tribe, ethnicity, in evaluating guilt. However, inspite of these two momentous occurrence, I was intrigued by a different phenomenon, one more apparent and obvious. I watched the central figures of authority in these branches of government. And conspicuous on each head, the Speaker, Kenneth Marende and High Court Judge, Muga Apondi, both wore these hideous blonde wigs in what appeared to be either oblivion or pride.
When I was a child, I copied and aped a lot. I pretended to be my father, a policeman, a soldier and we made costumes that allowed us to look the part. I believe we called it 'kalongo'. This throw back to my childhood was an epiphany into the state of Kenya's maturity. We have a population looking at figures in authority with real expectations of life and death, however the leaders are playing the part aping some distant colonial era, some servant of the Royal British Empire. This lack of self awareness or knowledge of self was excusable in the 1960s, but 40 years later we are still playing 'kalongo' and acting the part.
Games have no accountability and the outcomes are not real. We have had vision 1995, 2000, 2010 and now 2030. These are words on paper, a script for a well choreographed play, where all the actors go back to their real lives after the curtain falls with a fat paycheck, nothing real.
Some will site tradition, and I am the biggest fan of tradition, however we must pause and ask ourselves whose tradition. We as Kenyans run the risk of playing the baffon, the joker, the jester at every court. Parallel to a colonial tradition we have a liberation tradition and too often we have honored the colonial over the liberation tradition in Kenya and to some extent Africa. Lake Victoria, Victoria Falls are just symbols of this immaturity, an inability to take full ownership of yourself.
We need to rediscover who we are and rekindle what our true values were and here is my short list of where we should start.
Honourable members, on Thursday, April 23, just as the House was about to resume the interrupted debate on the Motion for the approval by the House of the names of Members nominated to serve on the House Business Committee, the Member for Kisumu Town West, the Honourable John Olago-Aluoch, stood on a point of order claiming to raise an issue touching on the ability of this House to defend the Constitution. The Member noted that the Motion for approval of Members of the House Business Committee had been brought by the Honourable Vice-President as Leader of Government Business. He, however, sought to know from the Chair who under our Constitution is supposed to move the Motion.
Citing the definition of the ‘Leader of Government Business’ in the Standing Orders, which at Standing Order 2 is defined as "the Minister designated by the Government as the Leader of Government Business in the House" the Member posed the question: "Who is the Government in the context of the Kenyan situation?"
Olago-Aluoch went on to argue that ‘Government’ in the context of the Kenyan situation is defined by the Constitution and the National Accord and Reconciliation Act and that, considering the functions of the Prime Minister as set out in the Constitution, the inference from the Constitution and the National Accord is that the Leader of Government Business and the chairperson of the House Business Committee is a constitutional affair. It was the argument of the Olago-Aluoch that the Leader of Government Business ought to be the Prime Minister and that it would be unconstitutional for any other person to be the Leader of Government Business or the chairperson of the House Business Committee. He, thus, sought a Ruling from the Chair on these matters before the House could proceed.
Weighty Matter
The Chair took the view that the matters raised by Olago-Aluoch were weighty and decided to hear a few more contributions from Members before indicating the way to proceed.
Honourable Members, what followed was a barrage of learned and educated opinions by many Members canvassing various positions on the issues raised. In the process a number of Members also raised new issues which merit consideration and comment by the Chair. Some of the Members who gave opinion or raised issues include Honourables Mutula Kilonzo, James Orengo, Gitobu Imanyara, Kiraitu Murungi, Dr (Wilfred) Machage, Isaac Ruto, Uhuru Kenyatta, Charles Kilonzo, William Ruto, Walter Nyambati, William ole Ntimama, Abdul Bahari, Prof George Saitoti, Chris Okemo, Peter Munya, Elizabeth Ongoro, Dr Naomi Shaban, John Mbadi, Prof Sam Ongeri, Ababu Namwamba, Prof Anyang’ Nyong’o, Bifwoli Wakoli, Farah Maalim and George Thuo. This list is not exhaustive.
Honourable Members, you will recall that at the end of all the contributions, I delivered a communicationin which I among other things promised, without prejudice to the Ruling I undertook to deliver today, to seek direct audience with His Excellency the President and the Right Honourable Prime Minister with a view to bringing the matter of the constitution of the House Business Committee, its chairperson and the Leader of Government Business to a speedy and amicable conclusion. I also undertook to make known to this House, the results of that initiative. Indeed, I will do so in the course of this communication.
Speaker ill-equipped
Honourable Members, before I get to the heart of this Ruling, let me remind you of what I said on Thursday, 23rd April, 2009. I said then and I repeat now that the office of the Speaker of the National Assembly is singularly ill-equipped to advise on or determine for the for the Executive arm of Government, and, for that matter, political parties, how they shall run their affairs.
I further stated that the Speaker will limit himself to questions of constitutionality, statute and the Standing Orders, but only so far as these relate to the business and affairs of this House. I, therefore, want to make it clear from the onset that subject to these qualifications, I do not intend to traverse territory that is outside the province of my office.
Honourable Members, I have distilled the following issues from the points of order and contributions made:
a) What is the definition of the Government in the context of Standing Order No 2?;
b) Whether the Speaker having recognised or allowed the Vice-President to appear before the House as the Leader of Government Business, is estopped from entertaining any questions as to the legality or propriety of his incumbency as such;
c) Whether the House has any role in the nomination or determination of the Leader of Government Business;
d) Whether the Constitution, as read with the National Accord and Reconciliation Act, provides for who shall be the Leader of Government Business in this House;
e) How any inconsistency between the National Accord and Reconciliation Act and the Constitution, or for that matter the Standing Orders, is to be resolved;
f) What the Speaker is to do in the event that he receives two different letters from the same Government designating different persons as Leader of Government Business in the House;
g) Whether the House can remove a Leader of Government Business and if so by what procedure;
h) The procedure for nomination of the chairperson of the House Business Committee and whether the nominee of Government for chairperson is to be part of the list submitted to the House for approval or is additional to it;
i) Whether the House can proceed to approve the membership of the House Business Committee without regard to the question of who the Leader of Government Business or the chairperson of the Committee is.
Honourable Members, I seek your indulgence as the menu of issues for determination is very long. Allow me to pronounce myself as concisely as I can on each of these issues:
The first and probably the most important issue is the question of who or what constitutes the ‘Government’, for the purposes of the designation of a Minister envisaged under Standing Order 2. This issue was canvassed at length and is at the core of the present impasse.
Various documents were cited as providing the answer; including the Interpretation and General Provisions Act; Chapter 2 of the Laws of Kenya
, the Constitution and the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. The simple question being asked is this: When the Standing Orders provide for designation of a Minister to be the Leader of Government Business in the House by the Government, who is envisaged to make that designation?
Honourable Members, the position of Leader of Government Business exists in virtually all Parliaments in the Commonwealth. There are, however, no hard and fast rules as to who shall hold that office. In some jurisdictions, the matter is expressly provided for in the Constitution, while in others it obtains by statute or the standing orders. The following few examples shall illustrate this point:
No Universal Rule
In the Republic of Ghana, the Leader of Government Business is not specifically provided for in the Constitution and the holder of that office need not be a Minister. In fact, today, the Leader of Government Business in the Parliament of Ghana is not a Minister. He is not a member of Cabinet and cannot lay a paper in the House on behalf of a Minister.
In the Republic of Uganda, pursuant to Article 108A of the Constitution, the Prime Minister is designated as the Leader of Government Business in Parliament. In the United Republic of Tanzania, under the Constitution, the Prime Minister is appointed by the President and is the Leader of Government Business in the National Assembly and has authority over the control, supervision and execution of the day-to-day functions and affairs of the Government.
In the Republic of South Africa
, the President appoints the Leader of Government Business in Parliament. In democracies with a longer history such as the United Kingdom and India, the Leader of Government Business is designated by the Prime Minister who is the Head of Government. There is, therefore, no universal rule of general application in this matter.
Honourable Members, in Kenya, the office of the Leader of Government Business is recognised and defined only in the Standing Orders. The position as defined in the Standing Orders must be construed, not generally, but only in the context of the National Assembly. The holder is the Leader of the Business of the Government only for the purposes of the House.
National Accord
The phrase ‘Leader of Government Business’ is not, to my knowledge, to be found anywhere in the Constitution or in the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. The position is not established by or under any other statute. It follows that neither the Constitution, nor any statute has provision on the appointment of the Leader of Government Business in the House.
In providing that the Leader of Government Business shall be the Minister designated by the Government, I find that, in terms of how the House functions, the Standing Orders mean no more than that the Leader of Government Business is to be the Minister designated by the Government. It is that organ that is entrusted with the running of the Executive arm of the Republic.
The office of Leader of Government Business in this House has been held by various persons since Independence. At some times the office has been held by the Vice-President while at other times it has been held by a Minister. The one constant thread running through is that the decision about who shall be the Leader of Government Business has always been in the Executive.
Honourable Members, a number of Members suggested that as the Speaker had "recognised" the Vice-President acting as Leader of Government Business at some point, the Speaker was, therefore, estopped from entertaining any queries on the legality or propriety of the Vice-President’s incumbency as such. This is not so. The role of the Speaker, as is well known, is to act as a neutral arbiter. The Speaker is not a protagonist in the arena that is the House. The Speaker does not raise points of order on his own motion...
Continues Thursday.
Hon. Kenneth Marende, E.G.H., M.P.,
Speaker of the National Assembly
28th April, 2009.
Barack Obama is now the president elect and Kenyans appear to be even more excited than the Americans about the prospect of an Obama presidency. I understand the excitement and even share in it, however now that some of the dust has settled Obama's victory got me thinking. Is Barak Obama even possible in Kenya. I will not mentioned the issues we have with tribe and ethnicity. Though they are huge. Even without these Kenyans are a unique set of people, an a diverse group. I recall when Richard Leakey and full blooded third generation white Kenyan attempted to run for president. He was rewarded with forty lashes of the nyahunyo and Kenyan sneers saying " Huyu Mzungu hajui kuwa tuli pata uhuru." What if he was the man for the job? What if Kenyan would have been better off with a Richard Leakey? What if the man for the job is different from the regular Kenyan? These are not part of the national discourse as we shout OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA. For Kenyans your cultural heritage in an inherent part of the equation of your eligibility.
Now to many Kenyans Leakey is an extreme example but how different would this be from Obama's historic victory in the USA. Kenya has a number of nationals who have only been allowed to participate on the periphery of Kenyan politics.Like minorities in the USA they have been allowed to participate on all other areas with relative success but have been kept away from the political arena. First, its the Asian or rather Kenyan's of Indian decent. These Kenyans have been stereotyped as corrupt and no good elements, I know we have had our share of no good Kenyan Indians, but it is no reason to black list the this or any other community based on the actions of a few. Kenyans will willingly accept Patel's contribution to the economy, even cheer Rajit where it concerns hockey and cricket, but do not touch siasa or atleast the highest levels of siasa. Hiyo ni kazi ya mwafrika mweneji wa kabila yangu. Perceptions of so called Kenyan Arabs is no better. Then there is the so called half-caste, who we canot quite place. Kenyans continue to view our lighter skinned brothers as peripheral to the nation's destiny.
Now I have to be fair here. The Mafrika is not solely at fault here. The entire Kenyan family has to play in the same sandbox; and want to play together. We have had selective self-segregation in our schools, residential areas, clubs and pubs, based on race, tribe, religion and or national origin. We need to grow. So for all the faults that are sited about America and American society, we as Kenyans have a lot to learn and grow on treating our own as equals. We need to expose our own issues, we will never change unless we Paza Sauti.
My concern is about the blatant lies associated with the occasion that we have been living with for a long time. Old wisdom informs us that when a lie is told several times, it actually turns into truth. At the risk of displeasing some people, let me highlight some political lies about Kenya and the late President Kenyatta.
We have been told several times that Kenya gained independence in 1963. We have also been informed that Kenyatta was not only the country’s founding father but also a quintessential freedom fighter. I have spent a lot of time perusing relevant documents to establish the veracity of these claims but I have not been able to find any truth in them.
Divide and rule
Colonial rule had certain fundamental pillars. Through a carefully conceived ‘divide and rule policy’, colonialism was implanted to secure the exploitation of Kenya’s human and material resources. In addition to promoting ethnic hostilities among the African communities, colonial rule was both dictatorial and intolerant.
Those who challenged colonial authorities were killed by the police, jailed or summarily detained without trial. Under the system, the imperial Governor presided over a prefectural network that ensured that British government policies were fully implemented.
On their part, the Africans paid taxes without representation and provided the cheap labour, which facilitated production of wealth. Influential public service jobs went to whites and very few African collaborators. Furthermore, most of Kenya’s productive land was alienated and given to Europeans. Education opportunities for the African people were scarce. Kenya belonged to the white people.
![]() |
Kenya’s First President Mzee Jomo Kenyatta |
Our struggle for the second liberation was hijacked in 1992 when Moi — the second black governor — took charge of the proceedings by pretending to be a democrat. He rigged the first serious multi-party polls since 1963 and retained the status quo.
In 2002, the peoples’ second attempt to overthrow Kenya’s black colonial rule seemed to succeed when Narc swept its way to power and promised real change. What followed, however, was an anticlimax of our dreams. In a recent interview with media officials, former Lurambi Member of Parliament Masinde Werangai captured the hopelessness of our political situation when he conceded that the promises of uhuru had not been fulfilled by successive Kenyan governments.
Genuine heroes
The lie that Jomo Kenyatta was the founding father of the country should not be allowed to continue. As truly conceived by genuine founding mothers and fathers, the Kenyan nation is yet to be born. What helped Kenyatta to rise to the top was his mastery of pretense and deceit. Kenyatta knew how to mimic what he was not. This is demonstrated by the way he easily changed names to hide his true self. Although he was born Kamau wa Ngengi, he changed to John Peter and by 1922, he had become Johnstone Kamau. While in Europe in the 1930s, he became Jomo Kenyatta. In 1963, Kamau wa Ngegi was simply known as Mzee Jomo Kenyatta. So what is the difference-in character and deed between President Kenyatta, Mzee, John Peter, Johnstone or Kamau? Was it safe for Kenyans to have entrusted the institution of the presidency in a person whose names kept changing?
After spending along time in Europe, Kenyatta returned home in 1946 and shortly seized the leadership the Kenya African Union party. Although he was mistakenly arrested and jailed for being a member of the Mau Mau, Kenyatta denounced the nationalist movement several times and eventually set the record straight during the Kapenguria trial of 1953.
His nationalist credentials were further undermined by the fact that during his presidency, he became the biggest land owner in Kenya when he acquired over 500,000 acres of land. Besides, he made it his top priority to punish and neutralize freedom fighters who questioned his political practices.
Crushed dissent
Throughout his rule, Kenyatta did not hold any presidential elections to test his popularity. It is tragic that such a person has been branded founding father and freedom fighter.
Like the colonial governor before him, Kenyatta crushed dissent without mercy, terrorised political opponents using the police and detained without trial those with divergent opinions.
Contrary to the dreams and aspirations of the freedom fighters, Kenyatta failed to unite Kenya when he embarked on the programme of Kikuyunizing the public service, by replacing the outgoing Europeans with his own kinsmen. At the height of his presidency, he failed to appreciate Kenya’s diversity when he receded to his own ethnic cocoon.
This was not surprising because, from the very beginning, Kenyatta’s political operations revolved around Kikuyu nationalism. It is noted that as early as 1929, he had been sent to London by the Kikuyu Central Association to lobby for Kikuyu tribal land rights. He even edited a tribal newspaper, Muigwithania.
We have to recognise that the struggle for independence which began in the early 1890s when British rule was imposed on our people was never concluded in 1963, 1992, 2002 or 2007. It continues to date. In addition, the true heroes of Kenya’s liberation combat include the brave fighters of the Chetambe War of 1890s, the champions of the Mau Mau era as well as the stalwarts of the Giriama and the Nandi resistance. These people deserve respect and recognition.
Individuals who should make the list of founding fathers and mothers of Kenya should not be Jomo Kenyatta and his fellow traitors of the freedom struggle. Genuine freedom fighters include, Mekatili wa Menza, Koitalel arap Samoei, Harry Thuku, Fred Kubai, Bildad Kaggia, Masinde Muliro, Elijah Masinde, and Jaramogi Odinga Oginga, among others. Contemporary scholars have an obligation to the people of Kenya to rewrite our history by correcting the lies we have lived with for a long time.
By Dr. Edward Kisiang’ani
Dr Kisiang’ani teaches History and Political Studies at Kenyatta University.
Kisiangani2007@gmail.com
I have been intently following the US presidential elections since Joe Biden, being the first to do so, announced his intentions to seek the Dems nomination. Since then the kamuthonjo (a clique) has congregated many a time and because the polls are in favor of my predictions i'm due to collect from Kangethe and Co. come November 5th.
My accurate (i can claim that now) forcast has not just been based on luck and a nag for making a quick buck, it is the ability to identify a force much larger than the usual politico that has shaped my ideas and opened my views.Why will Barack Obama gain the title of POTUS over John McCain?
John McCain /Sarah Palin campaign does not realize that they are not running against a presidential candidate but rather a movement that seeks to vote in its leader as president.I can imagine telling my kids of a fella with a funny name who run for the highest office in the land by offering Hope to its great citizen.
I don't condemn those who don't buy it, come to think of it, on paper this does seem to be straight out of the snake-oil salesman's handbook, then again he must be a really good salesman because not one iota of slander seems to stick. I don't know if i should give credit to the citizen who seem to have figured out the ridiculous claims or to John McCain who for his age should be very wise and should not have made some very puzzling decisions during the phase of the campaign.
With that I foresee a few new dictionary entries not too far from now:
Obama: verb the act of a true underdogs ability to achieve success with great measure without the use of fear mongering and deceptionBush: noun one who influences others by use of fear and wmd's ..or wait that is also known as a scarecrow.now let me go collect
| | | | |
| The killing fields of Cote D’Ivoire! How could that be so? How did a country so famous for its economic prowess become known as one of the many 21st century sites of murder? The killing in Cote D’Ivoire was systematic and in most cases based on ‘if’ the perpetrator felt that the victim was a supporter of Allasane Outtara. Quttara was one of the presidential hopefuls, denied the right to run for presidency because the Cote D’Ivoire constitution recently made it impossible for individuals with a “foreign parent” to run for presidency. How the “foreignness” of the individual was determined remains questionable. The slaughter of an estimated two hundred Dioula people in the capital Abidjan, during the month of October 2000 came as a horrible surprise. It is hard to imagine that Cote D’Ivoire and Ivorians could have fallen so low as to kill each other like that. Suspicion, dislike, and hatred among different ethnicities are part of the problem whose roots can be traced to the colonial times. When France exited Cote D’Ivoire in 1960 it left behind the eloquent and much loved Houphouët Boigny. President Boigny is considered responsible for the influx of immigrants in the country. He allowed immigrants from the neighboring Mali and Burkina Faso to come into the country and take up jobs, which were at the time perceived as supplementary to the then affluent Abidjanaise population. The notion of a “political other,” who through propaganda becomes the cause of ‘all things wrong’ and must therefore be annihilated has for many years been propagated to destructive ends. The Dioula have conveniently become responsible for things going wrong in Cote D’Ivoire. Over time, they have come to be perceived as money-hungry, backward and perpetually destructive to the development of Cote D’Ivoire. The split in Ivorian society has the Dioula against all possible odds. It is not clear whether President Laurent Gbagbo has done enough to rebuild a united spirit amongst his people. The North has not seen much development of social services since the crisis of 2000. In fact images on the BBC website showed boxes of mail in a post office in the northern city of Bouake that have not been delivered since 2002. Hospitals, schools and other government institutions have turned into white-elephant projects. So why is no one giving Gbagbo a little nudge? The president must be reminded that Cote d’Ivoire’s and indeed Africa’s future is dependent on unity and not on dividing people. So far, disarmament, demobilization and reintegration of the rebels, also called ‘Forces Nouvelles’ based in the North are taking longer than expected. Guillaume Soro, the former rebel leader, is said to be doing a good job but with little help. Gbagbo’ regime has exhausted its five year mandate. The president is currently under an extended two-year mandate since 2006 and has pushed elections back all the way to November 2008 from the earlier UN request of April 2008. Though Cote D’Ivoire has seen relative peace since the crises of 2004, work still needs to be done in terms of democracy. Many northerners and “perceived immigrants” still do not have the right to vote. Most of all, president Gbagbo has still not signed an agreement that would allow for Ouattara to run for presidency. It is clear that the incumbent is trying to buy all the time he can for reasons that may not be so noble. No one was ready for what happened in Kenya earlier this year. It does not take a genius to know that Cote D’Ivoire could be going down that road. If the international community does not intervene, God knows what will happen to the country. Like Kenya in East Africa, Cote D’Ivoire is a regional giant in West Africa. It would be bad to let the country lose its glory to ethnic violence. The collapse of Cote d’Ivoire would portend a lot of bad for the region. The international community must step in to save the situation if we are to rescue the coast of ivory from anarchy. |
To experience true change one does not need to look across to the land of opportunity; where now faces and sounds march across the continent under its banner, stumping and vehemently calling on its populous to embrace their persons.
Pay attention, read and listen to the voices of the sons and daughters of their great continent.Change and what it brings about and its portrayal as the new phenomenon ladies and gentlemen is nothing new.
There are many forms of government , some that have emerged as the present day blue prints to effective rule of law,while others are questionable and are revolting to those who's ideals include freedom (the do whatever , whenever i feel like flavor) and liberty. Sad but very true, Africa has always been the implementation guinea-pig grounds for bad foreign policies and influencing powers have one way or the other become tolerant to dictatorships and horrible governance. Here is good news, even with the current environment, of usual ignorance of the common African citizen, the tide has changed. The people are demanding accountability from the thrones of high office.
And it comes with no surprise to us Kenyans that at the this very delicate point in history we serve as the most viable of options is a world of confusion, misinformation, mistrust and general candidate skepticism. In a continent that has experienced devastating natural disasters world wars and continued gut churning conflict in a relatively short period of time, we are actually doing pretty good with ourselves.
We have proven to the world that we don't have to follow the rule and oppose principle, that a country who's two leaders are from different schools of ideology can successfully co-exist and work together regardless of their differences. Granted this template of governance is challenging and does take time and patients to formulate but progress is being made and effects of policy are being felt by the mwananchi relatively fast.Hopefully this will not turn into a loop hole route for every other Mugabe to evade consequences of their bad rule.
I have received very interesting remarks and comments on my previous article ' Raila should prepare for his day in court'. Most have had interesting things to say, but the most intriguing question is, how does ODM go to court? Or more specifically, how does ODM set itself up for a fair or rather a fairer outcome based on the current power structure, in which Kibaki controls both the judiciary and the executive? I don't claim to know all the legal/constitutional intrigues and machinations that may lurk in the process, but I believe that a lot of the pieces are in place for a legal resolution of this impasse.
I insist on a resolution based in Kenyan law for two reasons - one, once this issue is resolved, I would like this to be a source of national pride, a precedent, for Kenyan to say "Even when things fall apart, the center still holds” and this center is the basic humanity of Kenya’s silent majority and the impact of a rational population on an irrational system; where the people's justice eventually prevails. And secondly, to provide that indisputable framework for a resolution, which will stand within the existing law, thus robbing the PNU electoral bandits of their excuses.
First, ODM should not settle for a boardroom negotiated settlement. This type of settlement excludes the Kenyan people and is based on a ‘give and take’ with an illegitimate government, not mandated by the majority in Kenya. My thought is that the purpose of the mediation should be to work out a formula that allows for fair judicial process that will ratify or nullify the elections and have the resulting presidential by-election in the most reasonable time-frame. The sooner decisions are taken away from the boardroom and brought back to the Kenyan people the better.
Under the Kenyan Law, we have provisions where judges from other commonwealth countries can serve and work in Kenya. This is one of the colonial heritage hangovers that may be useful in this scenario. We could use our otherwise valueless membership in this organization by getting a panel of judges, under referral, who will judge the dispute under Kenyan law. My suggestion would be an Indian, Tanzanian and a Zambian judge. This selection is not of the exclusive counties to consider, but of a mix of countries that have had some experience and some success in developing a democracy in the developing world. These countries have legal structures that have their heritage in the British system of law, thus very similar to Kenya. Select judges from these countries would be impartial unlike say British judges who would need to balance the just out come with British/Western interests in Kenya.
Once this impartial arbitrating body of commonwealth judges under Kenyan law is constituted and ratified, the political impasse issue should be passed to this body for judicial resolution as soon as possible, and Koffi Annan can continue with the humanitarian and long term constitutional issues that will provide a launching pad for the new administration.
A boardroom negotiated outcome can only be useful in an environment where both parties are trustworthy and are in touch with the public's interest. Neither of which is true. Kibaki has proved to be unreliable. He will renege on any and all good faith agreements - MOU, IPPG, Election pledges etc - whenever it suits him. For Kibaki, the Machiavellian law, where, the end justifies the means, seems to guide his every move. This conscience less partner necessitates a legal framework with penalties for non-compliance. If Koffi’s process does not hinge on a legal solution, then we can be sure Kibaki and his goons will find a way to turn this arrangement into a nightmare.
As I have said before, I am 'ODM damu' and I believe that this election was stolen by Mwai Kibaki and his cronies. I believe that this atrocity is unforgivable and those responsible should be charged in a court of law, for treason against the Kenyan people and receive the due penalty. Having said this, I am only open to peaceful means to resolving this impasse. My objection of violence is based on the same reasoning that demands that this electoral fraud must be resolved. The instance we perceive options outside participatory democracy, as viable means to obtain political power, be they electoral fraud or coercive means, opens a Pandora's box that offers legitimacy to illegitimate means. I am of the opinion that ODM should prepare for its day in court. I know this is an unpopular opinion in my ODM circles, I recently polled some of my colleagues on this question and a solid 85% were categorically against the idea, understandably so, because this opinion does not guarantee success and involves significant risks.
The first risk is one of principle - in going to court, in petition, one is accepting even though partially, or in interim, the legitimacy of this executive and allowing it to function, and exercise its full constitutional mandate as appointed by the people, and we all know this is not the case. The fact that the position that is disputed is the head of government, head of the military as commander in chief of the armed forces and the ceremonial leader of the nation, demands that this leader draw his mandate from the people and this be a true mandate. Therefore, as the court runs its course, we as Kenyans, ODMers would be in principle accepting this unpalatable fact, even in the interim.
The second risk stems from the fact that the individual, who occupies the sit of the presidency, even if in interim, wields an inordinate amount of power. This authority can be used with devastating effectiveness to consolidate power and obliterate any opposition or challenge to self perpetuation. This was masterfully displayed by Daniel Moi, in the constitutional ninety days, he was president, after Kenyatta’s demise in 1978. Moi was able to contain a powerful and wealthy opposition and proceed to rule for more than two decades, after witnessing the demise or conversion of all his opponents into his supporters.
A third risk is based in the concern that the executive has undue influence in the matters before the judiciary. Kenyan history is inundated with a prodigious number of issues that have met their conclusion, without resolution, in the Kenyan judiciary, through executive interference. Be it charges of assault by the first lady, to complex cases like Goldenberg. Amos Wako has reigned supreme, over justice, with his nolle prosequi and I do not know enough about the law to conclude that there any way to stop Mr. Wako from playing his trump card again. This position is supported by the AG’s lack of independence. He recently proposed a way out of the impasse after the elections. This proposal involved independent tallying of the vote, but one imagines, that the proposal was not cleared by his superiors, before it hit the media. The proposal was withdrawn a day later, I believe under the same pressure that Samuel Kivuitu had to announce the flawed results.
A final risk that I see, is specific to the Judiciary itself, independent of the Executive’s influence. We have had a large number of botched cases that are still unresolved and justice is still pending for the victims. Pinto, Mboya, JM, Ouko are just a few of the high profile cases, that have not been resolved to the extent where, we can say, justice has been matted in to an unrecognizable outcome. Thus, it is not clear that these courts can actually dispense justice. My thoughts are that these courts, where judges and lawyers wear white men’s wigs are designed to oppress the masses not dispense justice, but that is content of another article. In addition to this inability of the court to dispense justice the system places limits on the public debate on an issue that is before the courts. This restriction presents the threat that all meaningful discussion may be halted, while court proceedings continue.
Petitions fall in their own class; it does not take much to loose a petition in Kenyan courts. Kenyan legislators have, out of their own interests, made it very difficult to have a successful petition. Filing a successful petition requires a stringent adherence to rules and regulations that precedent has upheld, the following of letter of the law and not the spirit of the law. The precedents in Matiba and Kikabi’s own petitions against Moi have almost proved that the incumbent has the upper hand in any petition.
Hey, wait a minute, you must be saying, this article was why Raila should prepare for his day in court, yet all my arguments are re-enforcing the well entrenched idea that ODM should stay away from the courts. The primary reason I go into great lengths to outline the risks is to communicate my keen awareness of the risks involved, in employing this court strategy to overcome this illegitimate government. My argument is that court should not be relied on or discarded, but maintained as an option amongst a quiver full of arrows.
Now, let us explore the current options, with a view of determining who has the ace in each of the peaceful strategies employed by ODM. I in on no way claim to have their play-book. ODM may have someone with an infinitely larger strategic acumen; I am only calling it as I see it.
Mass action has been the predominant approach employed, and it has been fairly successful, to this point, though at a very high cost. I view success as maintaining this issue as a problem, and not allowing the illegitimate government to proceed with business as usual. My assumption is that ODM's goal is to ensure that the countries systems do not take on a post election stance, pending true resolution. The more Kenya looks like business as usual, the more the electoral fraud will be an event in the past. But this strategy can only keep the issue as current in the eyes of the media, international community, Kenyans and all other concerned parties. There are no power transitions that have been made in the streets; the streets only apply pressure for other measures to affect the actual goal. The mass action has taken the form of street protests, these have served the purpose of wining the perception war, the government, through its police action, is now widely perceived as a draconian and repressive regime. But who holds the ace in street mass action? If the Kibaki regime were strategic thinkers as opposed to reactionary buffoons, they would have stolen ODM’s thunder by allowing the rallies at Uhuru Park and asked ODM to guaranteed that the rallies are peaceful. I would even go further and have the police provide security for the rally. ODM would have had its national rallies, I am sure masses would turn up, possibly the one million people Raila promised, there would have been fiery speeches, then people would go home, and wait for ODM’s next move. If the rallies turned violent then ODM would be called to account as the violent faction. Therefore, the illegitimate administration holds the ace and is able to change the perception dynamics here. The fact that the government has not changed this dynamic, has more to do with the absence intellect, than the absence of the opportunity. Like a brutish ogre that swats a fly on its head with a club, and dies in the process, this government shoots itself in the foot, along with innocent Kenyans.
A more direct approach of mass action would be non-violent civil disobedience, imagine work go slow n critical industries, or all ODM members sit in the roads of all major cities, on railways and obstruct ports. Police would be overrun with arrests and the cells will not be able to hold the volumes. This approach allows ODM to hold the ace and raise the ante at their time and place of their choosing.
Parliamentary pressure is the most viable approach in my opinion. Here ODM have a both the ace and the constitutional platform to change the illegitimate government. ODM holds a majority in the house and both the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker position. The most direct approach would be would be a vote of no confidence in the president, followed by the necessary dissolution of parliament, then a new election. This would prove to Kenyans, more so than the world, that peaceful democratic processes can reflect the 'voice of the people'. The challenge here, is good old greed. As much as I love our ODM Members of Parliament, I know they are not selfless leaders and Raila would be hard pressed in appealing to the MPs to loose their seats to provide Raila with a chance to recapture his. The financial cost and the real possibility of losing both your seat and Raila not capturing the presidency, are perceived to be too huge a risk to undertake. The MPs would rather fight for democracy riding on the backs of mwanainchi as they do on all other issues. It would be a pleasant surprise if this option is given much thought and actually carried out. It would warm this skeptic’s heart.
A more plausible parliamentary option would be legislative gridlock - no bills, no budgets, and no business in the house. The true cost for this grid lock would be on the Kenyan people, as usual, because this will stop the schools and medical supplies, there will be government layoff and no contracts - development would come to a halt. But this like mass action, this approach would not hold any aces against the PNU bandits because they could dig in and wait this out, and at a certain point Kenyans will want their life back and this strategy could backfire with long term effects for ODM.
International pressure is the other option available. This option, though effective in rational environments, where the despot has some goodwill towards his people, and values his or her image in the global arena, has some flaws. In this scenario the despot opts to sacrifice his personal gains for the good of the masses and for the good of his image. Kibaki seems to be to far removed from the cause of the common Kenyan, as displayed by his Nazi like massacre of innocents, in Kibera and Kisumu. He also appears to be too morally inept to care about his legacy. But this is not the greatest weakness of this approach to resistance. For international pressure, one has to rely on a fickle international community. Who will change their pressure depending on what is politically expedient in each nation’s political climate, today it will be Syria- tomorrow Burma - the follow in will be Zimbabwe, depending on what’s hot for the week. ODM should not place all their eggs in this basket. Further more international pressure will only be sustained if the tripartite nexus of media, foreign national interests and a champion is sustained. The media needs to keep the issue alive; Kenya needs to be of some special interest to the international community; and one nation needs to champion the cause. These factors are all outside ODM’s control; therefore making the international community a necessary, but an unreliable partner. Mugabe has shown that inspite of a most concerted effort by the international community the despot still holds the ace and he has dig in and has remained in power like a nightmare in an endless night.
This brings me back to why Raila should prepare for his day in court. Taking this issue to court in petition moves the ace from either Kibaki or Raila and places it on the Judiciary. A legal strategy does not preclude the use of mass action, parliamentary pressure, and international pressure in concert with a court petition to this illegitimate I believe with all the challenges, the courts are a direct strategy that gores at the heart of the problem, the Kibaki presidency, and has a constitutional framework that can support a positive outcome and an actual change in government. All other options with the exclusion of parliamentary action will lead to a suboptimal outcome, as a result of give and take negotiations. For me a negotiated outcome will not honor the people’s voice of a Raila presidency, Kibaki as only the member from Othaya, and a shift in roles in parliament. Without this fundamental shift in the status quo, ODM can not effect the systemic changes of a Federal system and uprooting corruption systems and structure from the Kenyan society. Therefore, Raila must do what he is doing but also prepare for his day in court.
I ask this question having already seen what this man is made of. Kalonzo has shown his true colors and they are not pretty. When president Moi attempted to impose Kenyatta Jr. on our good nation, through his failed project, we saw what we thought was a new Stephen. He seemed to have seen the light and come out from behind the veil that had blinded our leaders and covered the country. We even thought he was ready for primetime and before Raila led us down the Tosha road, we thought mmmmh …. interesting …. Kalonzo has grown himself a pair of nuts, we like those nuts, this could just be the guy. We even shouted his name “Kalonzo” “Kalonzo” hoping we could drown the tosha drum beat.
Looking back, I see a number of judgment errors on our part; Kalonzo was a strong defender of KANU and the KANU record of corruption. Kalonzo defended the man, the system and the regime; he fought tooth and nail and only parted ways with Toroitich when Toro could not be of personal political gain to him. Naively, we may have seen this stand against the status quo as Mr. Kalonzo reflecting our values, our ideals, our hopes but we were mistaken. Kalonzo may have excellent strategy and political expedience, he may have nine lives and he knows how to make Kalonzo relevant beyond his support, but I am now convinced he is a just a politician, a self interested politician, I will even go further and say a selfish politician ‘bila msimamo’.
One may say, KANU years are KANU years, and that you can pin that KANU monkey on a lot of our politicians - Ruto, Mudavadi, Kibaki, Nyachae the list is long and I agree, we do not know about these individuals, but Kalonzo is now exposed. Let us look at his record, his post KANU record. Kalonzo seems to never have gone past the Kibaki tosha moment and like a scavenger with no standard he has waited for Raila to toss him a bone. Knowing that Raila was the wind behind Kibaki’s sail home, Kalonzo waited for Raila to make his Tosha 2 declaration. To earn him some marks, Kalonzo even tried to be on the right side of history during the Referendum, and Kenyans, wanting to believe that Kalonzo’s conversion was real assigned their values to his actions. He even would have died for Raila at one time. An interesting turn of events happened once Kalonzo knew that the declaration and impending coronation was not forthcoming, with nothing to personally gain, he orchestrated night time burglary, of the ODM Kenya registration papers, with his accomplices Daniel Maanzo and Julia Ojiambo, thinking that, the papers equal votes (This is how far the concepts of democracy are foreign to this self interested politician) Kalonzo was ready for the big time. No agenda, no vision, no following, by hook or crook, or what he called a miracle, he was going to be President. Well, we know how that story ends, a distant third, single digit percentage, was the value people assigned to his antics.
But wait, Kenyan politics has a funny way of rewarding losers, I just read that the hyena has his bone and is proudly gnawing on it. With the patience of a crocodile, this dinosaur has reinvented himself not only as pro Kibaki, but as his VP. Hongera Bwana Kilonzo, but it must be amnesia on your part or are you counting on amnesia on our part. Do you remember your own words “I will die for Raila” Do your own words mean anything? Or is it too much to expect some consistency on your part? Three, no even two months ago, you were Kibaki’s harshest critic. Where did this new found love come from? Learn a lesson from your predecessor Uncle Moody. He was hailed as chairman of the Summit at one point, he now is on the political trash heap, rejected by his own.
I am not disappointed that Kalonzo would take the position offered to him by this illegitimate government; I am disgusted, that to this date he has not stated his position on the flawed election. He has not condemned the rigging; he has not called it free and fair, he has not even put forward a road map for peace. Like the ruthless opportunist he is, Kalonzo has no stand on this loss of property, life or democracy and if asked about it, I am sure he will give you the answer that gives him the most personal gain. Everything else is just trivial. When Kalonzo was asked if he was surprised with the appointment, he said “I not surprised by the appointment,” “I have been consulting before the announcement.” This man will use any situation for personal gain.
Let me start by coming clean, I am an ODM supporter, a Raila man, who believes that that a serious injustice has taken place and this has set Kenya’s electoral process back to the stone age. I believe that the current administration is at best improperly constituted and at its worst illegitimate, and what has happened is unforgivable and the responsible individuals must stand and account for their actions. Having said this I am appalled at the lack of leadership, wisdom, and sincerity displayed by our so called leaders, where is our Mandela, Mahatma or Martin Luther King Jr.? Who will stand and be counted amongst the greater men/women in society for a time as such as this?
The Aggrieved
I have heard PNU members shout in their characteristic arrogance that they won the elections, advising the 'aggrieved' to go to court for resolution. My anger burns against this group for the aggrieved are not Raila, Mudavadi or Ruto for they will be fine with or without the presidency. The true aggrieved are the Kenyan people who have lost their brotherhood, their innocence and their lives. We will never be the same again. Ms. Karua, Uhuru, Nyamweya - please note I have left out the honorable because there is nothing honorable about these individuals - tell me, which court of law will restore brotherhood, what judge will confer trust back to us, and can even chief Gicheru in his highest court resurrect our fallen? So let us be clear, what is at stake here is more than your little egos, this puny competition or your war of words. Remember humility is hard and arrogance is easy.
The Prime Movers
For Kibaki and Raila I reserve my highest disdain - one is like a hyena on a stolen carcass he sits on his throne unaware of the stench and filth around him. He is like a pillar of salt cursed by God. You are the alleged president so act like one, even if it is just a performance, the EU, the US, the UK, the LSK, the AG, the ECK and even that ECK chairman who announced you king, all say something is amiss. Observers both foreign and local all say all is not well, but like the proverbial ostrich you bury your head thinking, "if I close my eyes long and hard enough, I will truly live in my dream." Wake up, put a plan on the table, negotiate, have mediators foreign, local, rural anything to stop the madness. Didn't you just swear on the good book protect the citizens? I say again, humility is hard and arrogance is easy.
And to Raila please follow your own words. Where is the 'Mandela like figure' you so often mentioned? Were these just words? Did you just want to charm us? Remember Nelson was "aggrieved" for 27 years yet he sat and negotiated with his foes, for the good of the masses. How can you be the people’s president if you cannot look beyond your own pain and see the people are suffering, the people are scared, and the people are lost in a wilderness? You are like a man walking backwards, a Paul turning into Saul. Shake off the scales from your eyes, before we find you hurling rocks at Stephen. Wake up and lead your people to safety and the 'Voice of God' will call you forward. Remember, anyone can claim their rights and be brave about it, but one who lays down his rights for his fellow man and is humble in doing so, shall be exalted for humility is hard and arrogance is easy.
The Father Figure
One other 'leader' who has squandered his inheritance on worldly pleasure is Moi. They say wisdom comes with age, but this is not always the case. Like him or not, President Moi is the one man in Kenya uniquely placed to act as a father figure at this time, when the nation desperately needed a father to give kind words of advice and counsel, but fearing irrelevance and like an alcoholic who just cannot have enough Moi had to involve himself in partisan politics in this election. "Just one more drink, this will be the last" you said, but now you have lost it all. Remember to whom much has been given much will be required. What will you say when you are before the Judge, when he asks " I raised you for such a time as this" Woe unto to you, for you set out to build a lasting legacy, but now that you look back all you see are ruins, with both you and yours rejected and irrelevant.
The Cheerleaders
Uhuru, Kombo, Mudavadi, Kalonzo, Saitoti, Kaura, Ruto the list is endless, - a group of non-leaders sitting on the sideline, and like the proverbial hyena following and watching as the arm swings hoping it will fall off, so that they can have a bone to gnaw on. Like cheerleaders in their little skirts they jump up and down and all their words just say "look at me, look at me". Be careful! You will go in the way of Gideon and Nyachae, leaders who refused to read the times and be relevant. Here is my advise, you have less to lose in comparison to Kibaki and your pain is not as great as Raila's, you have an opportunity to whisper a third way into their ears. "Let us consider the people, let us think of those in the cold, the grieving, the hungry," you should say. Pull them down from their hard-lines, help to make a way where there is no way. And maybe you may raise and be counted in their stead.
| This is one of the more reasoned opinions in the Media. Why Kivuitu must be held accountable for poll chaos Story by DONALD B. KIPKORIR Daily Nation: Publication Date: 1/5/2008 | |
|