Majimboism is a Time Bomb!

Majimboism is a time bomb about to explode. When it does, heads will role and someone is bound to lose the race to State House. To Mwai Kibaki and former President Daniel arap Moi, Majimboism is a recipe for tribal clashes that may even snowball into something more serious. They give examples of Rwanda and Biafra ethnic wars which literally saw rivers of blood flowing due to xenophobic bigotry.

To Raila Odinga and supporters of ODM, Majimboism is the answer to most of the economic problems caused by the concentration of political powers into few hands thus creating a huge gap between the haves and the have-nots. Leaders of ODM-K don’t seem to have a common stand on Majimboism. Whereas the party’s presidential candidate, Kalonzo Musyoka, has been talking in favour of the policy, his spokesman and the party Secretary General, Mutula Kilonzo, has described it as a snake pit.

Whether the voters accept or reject Majimboism, the result will be a painful rejection of a major party’s policy. If it is rejected the bomb will explode on ODM and if it is accepted, PNU will sink with its policy of unitary and powerful central government. Whatever the case may be, the three major parties will have to explain in an unambiguous and quite convincing language, the stand they take on Majimboism in the manifestos they have yet to launch. The fact that the country is divided between the three political parties along regional lines, long before any manifesto has been launched, means ethnicity will play a major role in determining whether or not to accept Majimboism.

Though they will not publicly accept it, almost all the political parties in Kenya are made up of powerful tribal leaders who command immense despotic powers in the areas of their origin. Indeed the genesis of ODM was an open tribal meeting between Luo, Luhya and Kalenjin elders representing Raila Odinga , Musalia Mudavadi and William Ruto who agreed to cooperate in order to snatch political power from the people from Mount Kenya region. The idea of Majimboism is popularized by the notion that it will encourage the distribution of the national cake more equitably throughout the country, as opposed to the perception that the present day government financially benefits a small Mount Kenya group of tycoons close to Mwai Kibaki, more than it benefits the people outside the Central Province.

When thinking of economic benefits that can come out of Majimboism, as it is preached by the ODM, many Kenyans support the policy; but when they think of tribal clashes that could possibly originate from the same policy, they don’t want to touch it with a barge pole. The success or failure of Majimboism as a policy in Kenya will depend entirely on the manner in which its two conflicting interpretations are delivered to the people. So far all sorts of propaganda are spread by both camps and the powerful Catholic Church has openly decided to condemn it.

Among the most lethal tales told about Majimboism is that it will give the current provinces so much autonomy that some of them, like the North Eastern Province, may opt to introduce Islamic Sheria Law as soon as the new policy is introduced. The very thought of the introduction of Sheria Law in Kenya is bound to make the majority of Kenyans automatically reject Majimboism.

While backing the policy, Raila Odinga claims it is among the Bomas constitutional proposals rejected by the Kibaki regime, but supported by the majority of the people of Kenya. That argument is likely to bring into close examination the Bomas constitutional proposals and make them an election issue to the advantage of ODM, which hopes to get the 2005 Orange referendum crowd on its side. Unfortunately the powerful Churches, which influenced that crowd two years ago, this time, seem to be opposed to Majimboism and they are preaching against it from the pulpit.

The other story told against Majimboism is that its implementation will create xenophobic feeling which will make Kenyans call other Kenyans “foreigners” simply because they come from a different part of the country. Indeed that kind of feeling has caused serious tribal clashes in the Rift Valley and at the Coast provinces. The memory of those two clashes is bound to harbour very negative feelings about Majimboism among Kenyans. Today there are many Kenyans who were born and bred outside the regions of their ancestors, and if all of a sudden they were asked to go back home; only trouble could be the outcome of that eventuality.

In favour of Majimboism are stories of economic prosperity that will be spread across the country benefiting all citizens. Politicians backing Majimboism talk of the creation of new jobs throughout the country because of devolution of political and economic powers. They give many examples of countries where federalism has worked successfully such as India and United States. Supporters of Majimboism normally presuppose that the country unanimously accepted the Bomas constitutional proposals. They hardly ever talk about constitutional huddles to be cleared before such a constitution is introduced in the country. To them the Bomas constitution has been accepted by the people and it will be implemented as soon as Kibaki is out of power.

As the country becomes preoccupied with the debate on Majimboism another highly sensitive election issue seems o have been temporarily forgotten. And that is the inevitable nomination for both parliamentary and local government candidates. So far candidates have shown interest in the three major political parties – ODM, ODM-K and PNU. Of the three PNU seems to have a much bigger problem because within it are a number of political parties such as Shirikisho and New Ford-Kenya that seem to be rather reluctant to participate in a joint nomination process.

With rivalry within PNU threatening to tear the party into pieces before it has even crystallized, Mwai Kibaki seems to be sailing in very troubles waters. That, however, does not mean that all is well in the two ODM parties. They too have to face primary elections in the form of nomination of parliamentary and civic candidates. They have to come up with acceptable manifestos that simplify the policy of Majimboism to the voters. Whatever happens, this year’s general elections promises to be a battle of giants which could be quite bloody. And the war will be fought in the battlefields of tribalism and Majimboism.

PNU: A Formidable One-Man Party

The launching of the Party of National Unity as a platform to provide President Mwai Kibaki with a ticket to contest the next presidential elections seems to be a very well calculated scheme to bring together five political parties that are sure to win parliamentary seats in specific areas where the two ODMs will find it difficult to penetrate. These areas are a huge part of the Rift Valley, the entire Central Province, the Miji Kenda, Taita and Taveta areas of the Coast Province, large areas of Eastern Province, a section Western Province and a number of constituencies in the North Eastern Province where Kanu is still popular.

The decision is also likely to minimize the Kikuyu stigma that has been attached to almost every political party formed by Kibaki and his friends. When he formed the Democratic Party before the first multi-party elections 1992 his opponents accused him of establishing a tribal party for the people of the Mount Kenya region. The stigma was inherited by Nark Kenya which is still very popular in the region. Now it is Kibaki’s turn to accuse the two ODMs of being tribal political parties. Whereas ODM-K is mainly a party of the Kamba people, ODM too can be said to be a party of tribal leaders. It was in fact an outcome of a joint endeavour by tribal elders from Luo, Kalenjin and Luhya ethnic groups. Former President Daniel arap Moi openly says he supports Kibaki mainly because ha cannot, after leading this nation for 24 years, back any tribal political institution.

Kibaki is likely to be the only candidate that will seek election through the PNU ticket baked by Kanu, Ford Kenya, Ford People, Shirikisho and Narc-Kenya which will all sponsor candidates for both parliamentary and local government elections. Long before official campaigning has started the five parties seem to have established specific areas of the country where they are popular and likely to win. Though there are a lot of parties claiming to back Mwai Kibaki’s reelection, the five seem to have been carefully selected because of their popularity in their regions.

The clever move is also bound to keep Mwai Kibaki away from the internal wangles that are likely to erupt during the civic and parliamentary nominations in all the political parties including ODM and ODM-K. If the nominations will be free and fair, a number of the incumbent MPs will be shown the door by the voters and will never get their previous parties’ tickets that won them parliamentary and civic seats. Indeed Mwai Kibaki, Raila Odinga and Kalonzo Musyoka will be better off in their campaigns without the current MPs whom the people despise, disrespect and even loathe.

The choice by Mwai Kibaki of the five parties to sponsor him, rather than well over a dozen of them, will serve to reduce the chaos that was beginning to take shape in the scramble for the support for the President. Indeed a number of the parties that are singing the “Kibaki Tena” song do not exist beyond the briefcases in which their registration certificates are kept.

Uhuru Kenyatta’s Kanu has the majority of seats in the opposition benches and, with the support of retired President Daniel arap Moi, the party is still capable of winning a number of seats in the Rift Valley and North Eastern provinces; Simion Nyachae’s Ford People , is bound to win some seats in the Kisii area; Musikari Kombo’s Ford Kenya , is sure to win some seats in the Western Province ; Ali Makwere’s Shirikisho Party, which is proving to be very popular in the Coast, may win the majority of seats in that province and Raphael Tuju’s Nark Kenya is bound to win a number of seats in both the Central Province and a number of urban areas.

With a reduced number of presidential candidates and an increased number of political parties many voters will have quite a headache in choosing the next MP ; but as far as presidential candidates are concerned many Kenyans have already made up their minds. Today it is extremely difficult to criticize some of the presidential candidates in certain parts of the country as the people have already made their choice. But for parliamentary seats parties will do as well as they conduct their nominations in the next general elections. Those that handpick their candidates, as has been the case in the past, may live to regret it this time as the people are getting wiser and more educated about their political rights.

Of all the Kibaki supporters none has caused more damage to Raila Odinga’s ODM than Uhuru Kenyatta who has moved with the larger part of the party used by his father, Jomo Kenyatta, to fight for Kenya’s independence. He has been accused of abdicating his position as the leader of the Opposition in Parliament and thus betraying the anti Kibaki wave in the country; but Uhuru support for the President’s candidature does not in any manner indicate that he intends to quit the leadership of the Opposition in Parliament. As far as he is concerned he has taken the controversial step only to make his party be in the next Government to be formed by Kibaki after the elections, but not the current one.

In an effort to disintegrate PNU, ODM leaders have accused Uhuru of backing Kibaki only because he hopes to succeed him in 2012 when the Constitution will demand the PNU leader to step down. So far a number of leaders including George Saitoti, Martha Karua, George Saitoti and Kiraitu Murungi have declared their interest to succeed Kibaki and if Uhuru appears like the anointed son then the others are supposed to be annoyed with Kibaki. This propaganda however is not likely to be taken seriously by anyone since all political parties, including Kanu, will be interested in occupying State House after Kibaki.

As Kibaki, Raila and Kalonzo prepare for the final battle, one prominent politician who appears to have a lot of difficulties to determine who to support is Charity Ngilu, who is in fact, torn between the three contestants. Whereas she serves in Kibaki’s Cabinet her heart is with Raila Odinga while her constituents demand that she either supports Kalonzo or face the wrath of the voters. If she gets a strong opponent who obtains Kalonzo’s backing she may very well lose her elected seat in Parliament.

All in all, the PNU appears to have been formed after all the possible consequences and all the potential harmful pitfalls likely to pull it apart have been examined and avoided. It is a formidable party likely to pave the way back to State House for Mwai Kibaki.

The error of ignoring Moi

Retired President Daniel Arap Moi’s open support for Mwai Kibaki is a serious blow to both ODM’s Raila Odinga and ODM-K’s Kalonzo Musyoka. The move is most certainly likely to win Kibaki a huge pile of Kalenjin votes which he desperately needs. To the Tugens, Elgeyos, Marakwet and Saboats, Moi is still a powerful leader. He is also an extremely respected elder of the African Inland Church which has a huge following in the Rift Valley. All these groups will obediently comply with Mio’s directive to vote for Kibaki. Raila is likely to get the Nandi and Kipsigis votes which he will still have to share with Kalonzo.

As a consummate politician of the old school party discipline which helped him stay in power for 24 years, Moi is bound to be among the first to smell a rat in the manner in which both ODMs’ presidential nominations were organized. The most conspicuous abnormality of the two parties was the fact that they had no manifestos to talk about. Instead they had individual leaders’ policies which they have marketed on personal basis. Each party has leaders who claim to be united yet they openly differ ideologically. These abnormalities will most likely be trumpeted by Moi when he starts campaigning for Kibaki.

Moi’s suspicion was corroborated by the ODM-K's presidential nominations on August 31st and that of ODM on September 1st when the two parties conducted nominations without elected national officials holding any office. Whereas ODM-K could claim its delegates were made up of party elected branch officials, ODM delegates were merely handpicked and those suspected of not agrees with the party owner were simply locked out of the entire exercise. Yet the media gave the two incidents maximum publicity with minimum criticism.

When Moi hits the road to start real active campaigning for Mwai Kibaki, he is likely to point these anomalies out in a language the people will understand . He will therefore easily prove that the two parties are indeed personal properties of the candidates who won the nominations. The highly publicized presidential nomination exercises were no more than circuses which will give Moi a lot of ammunition to tear them into pieces. During the so called secret balloting at Kasarani the leaders kept talking about the high standard of democratic transparency in the two parties which was mysteriously achieved without national elections in both parties and in the case of ODM without even a constitutionally accepted list of members or delegates.

The two exercises must have had an arm and a leg as their price tags yet no one knows who actually footed the bills though it is not heard to imagine. The more spectacular the show was, the more expensive it must have become and Moi will have a field day in describing how a handful of sycophants were transported to Nairobi to endorse predetermined leaders in the name of nomination through secret ballot. This is a road Moi has traveled for more than two decades and will be quick to identify those who try to emulate him .

To a keen observer of the events of the two ODM presidential nominations, serious attempts were made to bring about the 2005 referendum euphoria and change it into a mob force against Mwai Kibaki. The only problem is the fact that the two groups are this time divided into bitter enemies that can only benefit Kibaki’s side. Besides, this time there are no powerful church groups which helped to swell the numbers of the referendum Orange group which, incidentally, was made even more powerful by Moi’s backing .

Being the shrewd politician he is, Moi is likely to use his Luhya friends to magnify the “loss” of the community at the ODM nomination and challenge the Raila’s offer of the number two position to Musalia Mudavadi. Like it has been suggested before, Moi will urge his Luhya loyalists to reject the offer which the Luhyas already have in Moody Awori. Right from the beginning Mudavadi did not seem very eager to oppose Raila and he actually participated in the nomination in the most lackadaisical manner – a tactic that ended up making Raila reap maximum benefit; but which may cause Mudavadi a very heavy damage back home in Western Province.

As the architect of the mlolongo voting system and an excellent manipulator of both the Electoral Commission and the Provincial Administration during elections, Moi will be an extremely useful advisor to Mwai Kibaki this time. Executive powers will most certainly be used by Kibaki to create huddles for both Raila and Kalonzo when the final race for the Presidency reaches its final stages. Samuel Kivuitu’s term of office as the Chairman of the Electoral Commission, for example, comes to an end in December, just before Kenyans go to the polls and the role Moi will play in advising Kibaki on how to fill the post will be sure to pose a great danger to free and fair elections.

So far Raila has survived by the use of clever tactics which were perfected by Moi when he was in office. These include the manipulation of the mass media and maximum use of ethnic loyalty which Kibaki will now learn to make use of from the master tactician which Moi happens to be. It was therefore not for nothing that a lot of Opposition politicians cried foul when Moi made his announcement to back Kibaki.

During the referendum, areas that were dominated by either banana or orange returned ridiculous 100 per cent support for whatever stand they took, which means ballot boxes somehow were filled up by returning officers. Unless some very drastic steps are taken in the proper organization of the electoral process during the December polling, a similar tactic is bound to be repeated and when that happens Moi will be handy to advice Kibaki on what steps to take to remain in power.

As Musalia Mudavadi warned at Kasarani, this time there are 14 million registered voters and in a situation like that the Opposition has to work extra hard to make sure something unbecoming does not take place in the remote areas. With Moi sitting next to Kibaki during these elections it would be foolhardy to write off the former President’s influence in having an effect on the results.

No winner in the fight between two ODMs!

The acceptance of the original ODM by Raila Odinga from Mugambi Imanyara poses a number of questions: Has he surrendered ODM-K to Kalonzo? Will he still organize a delegate’s conference to endorse his leadership and pave the way to straightforwardly getting a presidential ticket? Was he all the time the real owner of Imanyara’s ODM? Will his game plan be accepted by the voters outside Nyanza Province? Has everyone supporting him read and understood the constitution of ODM?

As Raila will not be able to own two ODM parties, it is obvious he has surrendered ODM-K to Kalonzo, who has all the time claimed the law was on his side. This, in actual fact, means Kalonzo will indeed be the ODM-K presidential candidate. One major advantage he has is that his symbol and the very word ODM-K have now sunk in many a voter’s heads, to an extent that it will not be surprising at all for him to get votes outside Ukambani, as many people think ODM-K is still the most popular party.

On the other hand Raila and his group will now have an uphill task of disowning ODM-K which they will probably call “ODM-Kalonzo” and trying to popularize Mugambi’s ODM which they had earlier on condemned as Mwai Kibaki’s brain child intended to divide the Opposition. Kalonzo will also, most likely, call the original ODM “Odinga ODM” making Mwai Kibaki laugh all the way back to State House.

Organizing a delegates’ conference at a cost of at least four million shillings just to endorse Raila now looks unnecessary; but without a delegates conference people like Musalia Mudavadi may be accused by his people of Kakamega of cowardice, costing him a parliamentary seat as indeed happened in 2002 when he was the country’s Vice President. To Mudavadi accepting to be Raila’s Vice President can be extremely risky.

Apart from Musalia Mudavadi, who would like a delegate’s conference in order to take part in some form of contest before losing to Raila and accepting the Vice Presidency after missing the Presidency, people like William Ruto, Najib Balala, and Joseph Nyagah will back a delegates conference so as to be part of the pact that may offer them some powerful positions in Raila’s Government. The offer will then be used as a campaign platform to go back to Parliament. Other MPs backing Raila are only after ODM tickets to make them also go back to Parliament. To avoid both unnecessary expenses and getting his hand tied up in a memorandum of understanding, Raila may also avoid a delegates’ conference.

The question of whether or not Raila was all the time the man behind Mugambi’s ODM did not appear to bother anyone at a Press Conference on 14th August when the former was handing over the party to the later; but eyebrows must have risen quite considerably when Mugambi declared, without being asked by anyone, that he was not an extortionist. Had he in fact sold his party to Raila? That will always remain a secret between the two. All that Kenyans can remember is that Raila was one of the people who once called Mugambi a Government project to weaken the real ODM which at that time was ODM-K. Was Mugambi in fact all this time a Raila project? That, again, only Mugambi and Raila can tell, but will they ever do so? Time alone will tell.

Raila’s latest game plan will be most welcome in the whole of Luo Nyanza where the majority of the people want to see their man ending up at State House; but how many supporters of the politicians who attended the Raila- Mugambi Press conference will accept that real democracy took place in ODM on August 14th? Again time alone will tell but the real threat of the original ODM still remains a primary election to nominate ODM candidates. That is when Raila will come out in his true colours and back only those who have been genuinely elected by the people. Raila knows his political survival, as a powerful ODM presidential candidate, depends on a properly organised primary election throughout the country except in Nyanza, where he will still handpick his party candidates.

If Kalonzo organises a genuine delegates’ conference and allows his supporters to conduct a democratic election before conducting a truly democratic primary election, then the old ODM will be faced by a very strong challenger in ODM-K. Parties backing President Kibaki will only survive if they too conduct primary elections. Primary elections in Kenya will be forced on politicians, who have survived through decades by owning political parties.

Now the people are demanding the ownership of all political parties that claim to be popular. The process of conducting genuine primary elections will see many political heads rolling and may very soon have to be officially taken over by the Electoral Commission. Unfortunately the new Political Parties Bill 2007 does not make that recommendation though the Bill has gone through First and Second Reading.

As the leader of ODM-K, which he claims is a party of parties; Kalonzo obviously hopes Kanu and LPK will join him and form a formidable group. It is very doubtful whether Uhuru Kenyatta will back the move due to the influence of retired President Daniel arap Moi who wants to keep the independence party away from both ODMs. Uhuru’s plan, which is more or less the same as that of the Shirikisho Party, is to join whoever wins the next Presidential election and be in the next Government.

The constitution of the original ODM has not been made public but it is obvious the party belongs to Raila and he has already chosen party leaders who will never oppose him now or in the future. The idea of creating national positions to be distributed along tribal lines has always been Raila’s tactic to gain the support of the non Luos, but, this time, it is faced with a Herculean problem of changing the country’s constitution, which must be supported by at least a two third majority of members of Parliament in the National Assembly. Paradoxically Members of Parliament are now boycotting the Assembly until the Government approves their ridiculous golden handshake that will amount to stealing billions from the taxpayers of Kenya. Getting the Constitution of Kenya changed to create various national positions Raila needs to keep his party strong is like building castles in the air.

The Raila-Kalonzo unbridgeable crack

The political rope used in the ODM-K tug of war between Raila Odinga and Kalonzo Musyoka has finally snapped throwing the two rivals even farther apart without any hope at all of ever working together again. But the struggle to dominate the powerful opposition party continues and sooner or later it will be divided into two when one of them succeeds in kicking out the other. Kalonzo claims the law is on his side as party executives officially registered by the government support him, while Raila claims all the officials running the party headquarters are behind him. The party is sunk in greater confusion by the fact that both men are right.

The resignation of Kalonzo Musyoka from the LDP must have been a very well calculated move not necessarily to gain popularity but to make sure that Raila will never become the next president of Kenya after the December elections. It effectively denies Raila all the Kamba votes and frees Kalonzo to look for political partnership from any other quarter including the Mwai Kibaki camp. According to Agwambo the latest move by Musyoka amounts to deserting ODM-K. Yet this does not necessarily mean that Raila will become the undisputed leader of the party. Kalonzo is not the only rival Raila is facing. Even after the departure of Kalonzo Musyoka, if indeed it can be called that, Raila will still have to face Musalia Mudavadi in another confrontation.

The chances of Luhya people in general, and Kakamegas from Vihiga in particular, accepting Mudavadi to step down for Raila Odinga are very slim indeed. Likewise the Luos will never allow Agwambo to play the second fiddle ever again. The two men are likely to end up presenting nomination papers as presidential candidates separately due to uncompromising pressure from their people. With Kalonzo out of the picture, if indeed that is the case, the animosity between Raila and Mudavadi will soon start snowballing to a level of bitterness worse than that between Kalonzo and Raila.

But even in this new confrontation between Raila and Mudavadi, Raila is likely to come out triumphant as the undisputed leaders of the ODM-K. Whereas there are a few Luhyas who believe in Raila’s effective leadership, Mudavadi cannot claim to have any support what so ever in the entire Nyanza. ODM-K as a party therefore is beginning to take the shape of an individual’s property and that individual is without a doubt Raila Odinga.

As a lawyer, Kalonzo Musyoka knows the dispute between him and Raila may end up in court where the real battles will be fought giving him time to mobilize and test his forces. If the court favours him then he will be the undisputed ODM-K presidential candidate without the support of Raila Odinga. On the other hand if Raila wins the legal battle then, he too, will most certainly be the undisputed ODM-K candidate without the support of Kalonzo Musyoka and may be without the support of Musalia Mudavadi also. Either way ODM-K will be considerably weakened with the only hope of forming a very strong opposition in the next parliament.

In his heart of hearts Kalonzo would rather lose the legal battle and contest presidential elections as a third force with the hope of forming the next government with Mwai Kibaki. In this way he will make sure his Kamba people will be very powerful partners in Kibaki’s second term government. This must be the only strategy that gives him the strength to claim the ownership of ODM-K now, even though he knows the overwhelming majority of rank and file members back Raila Odinga.

If this scenario comes to reality the most puzzling question will be: What happens to Professor Julia Ojiambo of the Labour Party? The answer could be an assured nomination seat in the next Parliament. After all that is really all that the academic turned politician actually wants to be – something similar to what she is at the moment – a nominated MP. A mere nominated MP! That may sound too low a position for her but actually it is not. Parliament today is a gold mine particularly for nominated MPs who do not need to spend a penny for any campaign and not a cent for the development of any constituency. The lady knows she is being used to play a very major role in reducing the powers of Raila Odinga and if the plan succeeds both Kalonzo and Kibaki will be more than pleased to reward her with a nominated seat in the new Parliament after December.

Whatever way one looks at the agony in the ODM-K, it does not paint a rosy picture for the party’s future. Apart from the Raila – Kalonzo feuds there are bitter parliamentary nominations to be undertaken throughout the country. It is not difficult to imagine losers in the nominations ether joining the Kalonzo or Uhuru camps or any of the political parties which will be out for sale. Though the incumbent MPs are making so much noise in support of ODM-K, they will be the first to jump out of the party when they lose party nomination to go back to parliament.

Today there is a very large number of MPs who see ODM-K as an easy way to get reelected. Yet these MPs are more of a liability than an asset to the party. Their greed as MPs which started with putting up their salaries to be among the highest in the world, to making an attempt to get a golden handshake before they embark on election campaigns, have meant they have actually committed political suicide. Not even ODM-K will be able to save them from the people’s determination to throw them into the dustbin of history. As a matter of fact the easiest way for ODM to lose the next election is to nominate the current MPs to be its candidates in the next election.

Mwai Kibaki’s mysterious silence about which party to choose as his stepping stone back to power is obviously based on the fact that he is not eager at all to be associated with the current MPs. All the parties that back him have their own internal problems but none of these problems are serious enough to demand a new presidential candidate. In fact the war in these parties is based on who is more sincere and closer to Mwai Kibaki. Parliamentary nominations in these parties will also see very many losers trying to join either ODM-K or any of the more 200 political parties up for sale. The result will simply mean more of the current MPs losing their seats.

One of the MPs in very serious danger of losing their seats in Parliament is Charity Ngilu who is seen by the Kamba people as a traitor. If she joins Raila’s ODM-K, as most people expect, she will be jumping from the frying pan into the fire. But she too knows what she is doing as backing Raila means an assured nominated seat in Parliament.

In the final analysis the present fighting in almost all the major parties in the country may end up with only Raila and Mwai Kibaki fighting out to the bitter end. In that fight Kibaki is not as weak as he was during the referendum because today the issues dividing the people of Kenya are very different. The Orange’s strength has considerably weakened. If things do not change from what they are today the fight in December will be very bitter between those two candidates and Kibaki may end up in State House for the second time. His majority however will be considerably smaller this time compared to the votes he got in 2002.

Uhuru Rocks Both Kanu and ODM

Uhuru Kenyatta is a political power to reckon with. His refusal to submit presidential nomination papers to the ODM has seriously rocked the unity in what appeared to be the strongest force against Mwai Kibaki in the forthcoming December general election. It has also clearly shown who is the real boss of the section of Kanu that has a love hate relationship with ODM, which the ODM desperately needs to remove Kibaki from power. Yet he is now threatening to pull the oldest party in Kenya from the fragile ODM unity and is also posing serious questions no one in ODM is prepared to answer.

Hence the desperate and futile attempt to cajole him back into the fold in order to use him and his massive supporters as a mere rubber stamp for the benefit of an invisible manipulator within ODM. But alas, Uhuru has seen through the whole scheme and he is now fighting with the most formidable force of oratory and immense financial power to be given an audience. The whole country is now listening to him and whatever steps he takes will have far-reaching political consequences.

If he decides to run in the next election as Kanu’s presidential candidate, ODM will have no hope in hell of forming the next government. The majority of the people who gathered at Kasarani on June 11th Kanu NDC will vote for him in the hope of at least negotiating on equal footing with whoever wins the Presidential elections in December. Uhuru’s candidature will in fact open the State House doors even wider for President Kibaki with whom Uhuru has never said he will not negotiate. The chances of ODM forming the next government will be further reduced by Kanu’s sponsorship of a parliamentary candidate in every constituency. Uhuru has decided to do both for the benefit of his party and there is plenty of evidence to show that he is not likely to change his mind easily. After all he is a political animal who believes in the survival of the fittest in the struggle for existence.

William Ruto’s attempt to disregard Uhuru’s demands and kick him out ODM will neither get the support of the real power behind ODM nor that of ordinary Kanu members who look at Uhuru with new respect as a tough leader they never knew before. The real power behind ODM knows that without Kanu the party cannot threaten Mwai Kibaki’s popularity. Without Kanu ODM will also be exposed to the people in its true colours – which is a group of disgruntled politicians who once belonged to Kanu but pulled out in 2002 to form the LDP, another party that has yet to organise its own elections. So Uhuru is more powerful than many would like to accept.

The question he poses is extremely relevant: Is ODM an umbrella organisation that brings together like mined parties or is it a political party itself? The question may sound rhetorical and he probably knows its answer but if it is indeed a political party like everyone knows it to be, then it is extremely dangerous for Kanu to join it. Doing so will indeed be committing political suicide. It will simply be the end of Kanu. The question many are bound to ask is: Isn’t Kanu already in ODM? The answer is simple. Without Uhuru the entire party cannot claim to be in ODM and those who are in it individually like Ruto have yet to know Uhuru’s future schemes. Ruto without the support of Moi and Biwott in Kanu is like a pub with no beer even if he gets the support of the likes of Dalmas Otieno who is only in ODM to win a nomination in a Luo Nyanza constituency that will take him back to parliament.

It will not be surprising at all for Uhuru to organise another NDC for Kanu to see his plans endorsed. Indeed if there was a secret ballot at Kasarani on June 11th he would have carried the day. Besides that, he seems to be the only person in the party who can afford more than thirty million shillings needed to organise such a gathering. It is obvious that Uhuru will take that step before December as he has already tested the waters.

That there is an invisible manipulator in ODM there is no doubt. Its oath of allegiance removes all constitutional rights of freedom of association from whoever takes it. Uhuru has refused. It also demands to know what role one played in the so-called second liberation. Obviously Uhuru cannot answer that question positively as indeed he was against the second liberation if at all it can be called that. All the same today he speaks with a lot of political power behind him not only because of being the most financially dominant within both Kanu and ODM, but also because of his age. In December he will most certainly be the youngest presidential candidate and the fact that the vote from the youth will be the deciding factor in the elections is yet another advantage in favour of Uhuru. His wherewithal allows him to travel far and wide seeking the vote from the youthful electorate which must now be admiring his courage to call a spade a spade both within Kanu and ODM.

In this political game of intrigue both within and between Kanu and ODM the most amused observer, if an observer indeed he is, is the retired President Daniel arap Moi. When Uhuru joined ODM he disowned him, yet when he showed some teeth and willingness to bite he hailed the son of the first president. It will not be surprising at all to find out that Moi is perhaps the brain behind Uhuru’s stubbornness. Moi’s biggest headache remains the divided Kanu; but with Uhuru back in the camp it will not be surprising at all for the former President to play the role of mediator between the two factions of Kanu. With Nicholas Biwott, Uhuru Kenyatta and Moi in one united Kanu it will be the revamped and richest party in the country with the most rejuvenated presidential candidate.

A stubborn Uhuru is only one of the many problems of ODM. The other major one is how to conduct primary elections not only for the presidential candidate but also for the parliamentary candidates. In certain parts of the country such as Luo Nyanza winning the ODM nomination will be as good as winning a seat in the Legislature. So the campaign will be tough and, unfortunately, very ethnically oriented. If Uhuru can convince the people of Kenya that his New Kanu is above tribalism then both ODM, Narc Kenya and whatever party Mwai Kibaki chooses to get the ticket from will have to take him very seriously indeed. This is a new Uhuru Kenyans are seeing and he is an Uhuru with a lot of political power behind him.

Bitter Lessons From Magarini

The Magarini by-election won by Harrison Kombe of the Shirikisho Party has brought into light some unpalatable realities to Kenyan political “giants” who thought their influence was so strong among wananchi that their views would be taken as gospel truth without thinking. The first paradox to emerge was the fact that there could be no such a thing as an ODM-K candidate. The internal not-so-secret rivalry within the party meant that its ticket could only be won by one of the two major factions within it. In the case of Magarini Jefwa Kingi was seen as a Raila Odinga candidate and so got only a symbolic lukewarm support from the Kalonzo Musyoka’s faction.

Throughout the electoral process ODM’s most lethal enemy was ODM itself. The behaviour of its leaders at Magarini did not quite square with the picture of their strong front against Mwai Kibaki’s government. That picture, it became abundantly clear, was only a smokescreen used as a crowd puller to popularize the party. Though Raila Odinga, Uhuru Kenyatta, Kalonzo Musyoka, Najib Balala and Musalia Mudavadi all flocked to Magarini to campaign for Kingi, the voters were not impressed by their anti Kibaki rhetoric. Instead they strongly supported their humble and unassuming former MP.

The second reality that came out of the by-election is the fact that the Mijikenda people have now accepted the Shirikisho Party of Kenya as their own and will use it to negotiate with whoever wins the next general election to secure a respectable position for the Digo, Chonyi, Kambe, Duruma, Kauma, Ribe, Rabai, Jibana, and Giriama people who form its backbone.

The third revelation from Magarini is that many small ethnic groups which superficially appear to be insignificant are likely to emulate the Mijikenda people. The manner in which Kenyan political giants from large ethnic communities openly struggle for power has led to an upsurge of minority groups, which include the Mijikenda, formulating a mechanism to safeguard their political interests in their various rural constituencies such as Magarini.

This rural revolution in Kenya has become a critical part of political existence which was evidenced by the manner in which ethnic leaders from Ukambani and Western Province negotiated with President Mwai Kibaki soon after the 2005 referendum to have their own people included in the Cabinet. Charity Ngilu brought in Kivutha Kibwana and Mutua Katuku while Musikari Kombo opened the door for Moses Akaranga and Noah Wekesa.

The result of Magarini by-election is likely to make other tribal leaders tighten their various loose groups first to ensure that they go back to Parliament and then to establish a negotiating tool to use when fighting for their political rights in bigger entities such as ODM and Narc-K. It is significant to note that in Magarini the Mijikenda MPs united behind Kombe regardless of their political affiliation and they deliberately ignored other coastal MPs who are not Mijikenda such as Joe Khamisi, Masden Madoka and Danson
Mungatana.

This kind of unity among small tribes in preparation for the next general election is reminiscent of the civil right movement of minority African Americans who in early’60s united to gain political recognition. As Emma Jones Lapsanky puts it at that time black people in the US came to realize that the secret was in political power which could be used wisely, unitedly, and fearlessly. After this discovery a massive voter registration campaign was planned for Summer of 1964 when black leaders, come together with in Mississippi “for an intensive voter registration effort in terror stricken black communities.” [1]

Just as the black people of 1960 America, a number of Kenyan minority ethnic groups feel threatened and politically marginalized. The lessons learned in American civil rights movement, asserts Lapsanky (1970), was that black man could quickly acquire fundamental legal recognition through unity. She contends that a new generation was being created (in the 60s) – a generation of blacks who could never again have the same naïve awe of “Mr. Charlie”, and a generation of white youths who could never again bask in the security of innate superiority.[2]

Something akin to the American civil rights movement is emerging in many Kenyan communities in the form of ethnic nationalism which demands political, economic and social recognition in more or less the same manner as the African Americans did in the 60s. The political future of these ethnic groups is guaranteed in the choice of leaders they make as they vote in the next general election. The leaders who have been identified as heros in their own ethnic groups are in fact assured of their seats in the next parliament. Looked at in this manner there is no doubt what so ever that Raila Odinga as the leader of the Luo people is assured of his seat in Parliament in the same manner as Kalonzo Musyoka is as the leader of the Kamba people.

Musikari Kombo’s position as the leader of the Bukusu people is contestable as much as that of Najib Balala as the leader of the local costal Arabs. The power and control that Raila Odinga has over the Luo people is the envy of all other political leaders in Kenya who would like to have similar domination over their people at least to be assured a seat in Parliament which is now proving to be a very handsome source of wealth.

The proliferation of ethnic nationalism can therefore be identified as a direct result of incumbent leaders’ greed as well as a mechanism to bargain for political and economic equality with the big ethnic groups that are either in power or seeking it. The cause of confusion in both ODM-K and Narc-K today is based mainly on efforts by the incumbent MPs to retain their parliamentary lucrative jobs.

The other lesson learned through the Magarini by-election is that more than ever before the electorate has become issue oriented even as it nurtures ethnic nationalism. It appears as if those who are likely to win this year’s general election will be people with proven records of not only protecting their communities’ interests but also bringing about development to them. The Magarini MP is said to have used his Constituency Development Fund (CDF) so wisely that it gained him popularity which saw him go back to Parliament even after being opposed by such political giants as Raila Odinga and Najib Balala. May be the most disastrous outcome of the Magarini by-election is the acceptance of xenophobia by incumbent MPs as a means of retaining their seats in the legislature. In some cases like those in Mt. Elgon and Central Province it has led to bloodshed and death.

Emulating the style used by Kombe to go back to Parliament, tribalists among MPs are now fanning fires of xenophobia which they recognize can only be accepted and grow roots in their constituencies through conflict and bloodshed. The situation in Mt. Elgon and Central Province may be disastrous in appearance to everyone else, but to the tribal leaders, even though they will not say so in public, it is necessary and desirable. They have vested interests in tribal clashes.

This is very much like the thinking of communist revolutionaries. As Douglas Hyde, the late former editor of The Daily Worker says , economic crisis , social upheaval, defeat in war or victory which leave a nation bled white even though victorious are the preconditions of communism. He argues it would be less than human and, indeed, idiotic for the communist not, in his heart of hearts, to long for them. It would still more idiotic, he asserts, for the world leaders of communism not to work for the creation of precisely such situations. Beneath the propaganda and smokescreen of concern for social justice, he continues, this is always the real aim and purpose of the communist party line, nationally and internationally. (Hyde 1950)[3]

Yet another lesson to be learned from the by-election is that economic progress of certain Kenyans has also been given a tribal dimension. The Mijikenda people, who are among the poorest in the country, see “outsiders” occupying their coastal land as economic imperialists. It is the same feeling Africans used to have against Europeans and Asians in pre-independence Kenya. To paraphrase Jerome (1973) it is sad, but Kenyans must accept the fact that we are living in a country charged with tribal dynamite. Our economics has become a question of tribe. Hard though it may be to digest, tribal economic is a reality. The question of social, psychological and political development depends upon economic superiority.[4]

The Mijikenda people regard the massive occupation of their land by people from “bara” as tribal tyranny and they are infuriated by what they call “jipapa”.[5] Many other Kenyan tribes see the prosperous “outsiders” settling on their land in similar way. It so happens that the most enterprising ethnic group in Kenya that has prospered outside its own home of Central Province is the Kikuyus. Their economic opulence combined with political power under Mwai Kibaki is the real reason for the so called “unity” in ODM-K whose main agenda is to get rid of Mwai Kibaki. Though many of the ODM-K leaders accuse Kibaki of nepotism, they would all most certainly give top jobs in the government they control to the people from their own home areas. The way they organize groups of supporters among themselves attest to this.

The question “Is he one of us?” was brought into international fame by the former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher when she used it as “ a test which politicians and other public officials aspiring to her favour were required to pass.” According to her biographer Hugo Young the question also epitomized in a single phrase how she saw an aspect of her mission. This was to gather the cadre of like-minded people who would, with her, change the face of the Conservative Party and at the same time launch the recovery of Britain. (Young.1989)[6]. In a rather different setup Thatcher’s question was used by Magarini voters and it is likely to be used again in the December general elections throughout the country. Every voter will look at the candidates before voting and ask: “Is he one of us?” Magarini people did so with Kombe and the answer was “yes!” so they put him back to Parliament.



[1] Lapsanky, Emma Jones. “Black Power Is My Mental Health”: Accomplishment of the Civil Rights Movement, in Black Americans. Edited by John F. Szswed. Forum Series. Philadelphia.1970.
[2] Ibid
[3]Hyde, Douglas. I Believed: The Autobiography of the Former British Communist . The Reprint Society. London.1950.
[4] Jerome, Abraham. National Agrarianism .Vol. 2. Racism and Economic
[5] Jipapa is a big , dangerous man-eating shark.
[6] Young, Hugo. One Of Us . Macmillan. London . 1989.

Deya is ODM's suicidal pill!

The fragility of the ODM bubble is seriously threatened by an approaching sharp arrow fired by the self appointed, miracle performing, wanted criminal suspect Bishop Gilbert Deya. If a strong wind does not blow the bubble away from the path of the arrow it is sure to burst and render the artificial political unity in Kenya’s opposition politics useless. But even if a strong political wind blows the bubble out of danger, it will still remain a fragile one, far from the strong ball of orange fire that made President Mwai Kibaki shake in his boots in the 2005 referendum.

If there was ever a picture that truly told “a better story than a thousand words”, that which was circulated to thousands of Kenyans through the internet throughout the whole of last week was it. It showed the suspected smuggler of newly born babies, Deya, posing for the camera with Raila Odinga, one of the ODM presidential candidates. Altogether there were more than ten pictures – clear and irrefutable proof that Raila did indeed visit the suspected child smuggler and voodoo miracle performer who claims to be a Christian bishop.

On the night of March 15th Raila categorically denied in a televised interview ever going to “Bishop” Deya’s place; but the NTV On The Spot interviewer, Julie Gichuru, either did not know of the Deya-Raila pictures or simply let the ODM leader off the hook. Her persistent questioning on the relationship between Raila and Deya however revealed quite interesting information: They both come from Siaya and the politician was quite ready to come to the defence of the wanted suspected criminal: “Everyone is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty!” he said. Is Deya really an innocent man?

Writing for the British provincial paper published in Birmingham, Sunday Mercury, Fionnuala Bourke, says Kenyan police are seeking to extradite Gilbert Deya, whose controversial church has three branches in Midlands. Bourke says the Archbishop has been accused of running a baby smuggling racket where children were “miraculously born” in Africa to sterile women and then transported back to Britain.[1] Bourke exposes Deya as a conman who used tricks to get photographed with the Queen in order to promote his church. She claims the aeroplane with his name on it is actually not his but a hired one.

Whether Raila is backed by Deya or not no one will really know the truth. What is known however is the fact that the ODM London meeting of early this month was a total failure because Kalonzo Musyoka, Uhuru Kenyatta, William Ruto, Najib Balala and Julia Ojiambo boycotted it mainly because they suspected Deya was closely connected with the whole arrangement. In a press statement rejecting the London conference five leaders claimed Kenyans had become suspicious of the trip “which was being seen as a begging mission.” According to Daily Nation reporter David Mugonyi, Pastor Deya confirmed that he was one of the organisers and an ODM supporter. He says independent sources iformed him some of the leaders withdrew after they learnt that pastor Gilbert Deya was one of the organisers of the trip.[2]

There are many who will see Raila’s relationship with Deya as an extremely dangerous time bomb about to explode and wreck the very survival of the party which was already vulnerable to fragmentation caused by ethnic nationalism within it. His dependence on Deya’s financial assistance, if at all it is there, could ruin his political popularity outside Luoland for the rest of the current electioneering period. The matter becomes worse whenever Deya opens his mouth. As Raila was denying visiting the pastor’s offices in the UK, the self styled conjuror was telling a journalist of the existence of a MoU between him and Raila promising him the job of Kenya’s high commissioner in London whenever ODM formed the government after the 2007 elections. No wonder the majority of ODM presidential candidates boycotted the London meeting.

Apart from the Deya scandal ODM as apolitical party is deeply buried in power struggle between Kalonzo Musyoka and Raila Odinga. To paraphrase Henrick Smith, the renown Washington correspondent of the New York Times , in Kenya those two ODM leaders talk of politics as a game, and themselves as players. To be a player is to have power or influence on some issue. Not to be a player is to be out of the power loop and without influence [3] Kalonzo and Raila exhibited unusual skills in influencing opinion and support in the party both before and after the now infamous London trip.

Raila and his supporters claimed in London ODM would get an international platform and an opportunity to solve its internal problems. Before the trip he even managed to convince his rival Kalonzo that London would provide the secret to party unity. According to the Sunday Standard Kalonzo at that time said: “In London, we will sit and compare notes because all of us have campaigned far and wide. We will identify our weak points and improve on them.”[4]That was before the ball was in his court when he championed the anti-London crusade which left Raila almost single handed in his trip-to-London mission where he met Deya alone.

Many political observers saw a Machiavellian touch in Raila’s scheme of getting everyone to London to spread the ODM doctrine to the converted Kenyans in the Diaspora. His secret plan was exposed by Kalonzo who had the last laugh when the rip flopped despite Agwambo’s presence in the British capital. His anger was most conspicuous on his return to Nairobi when he addressed the Press in the most threatening language: No one was indispensable and there would be “no so and so tosha” this time. The message was loudly and clearly directed to Kalonzo Musyoka.

The rise of anti Raila sentiments in the ODM was a surprise to many political pundits. A lot of presidential candidates who backed Kalonzo were suspected Raila puppets. One of them, Najib Balala, had to admit himself in Mombasa hospital to save face while the other, Musalia Mudavadi, had to pretend to be too busy talking to the Mijikenda people in Malindi to be bothered about the party’s international image. All these moves by Kalonzo, Mudavadi and Balala joined by William Ruto and Julia Ojiambo were first warnings to Raila that he was losing grip of absolute control of the party the way he used to control the National Development Party before he dissolved it to become Kanu’s secretary general under President Moi only a few years ago. Is the political momentum which Raila used to manipulate to his advantage losing its strength?

Until today ODM strongly believes it has what it takes to remove Mwai Kibaki from power in December this year. In an almost euphoric manner its members have what Robert G. Wesson, a former specialist in Sovietology who was primarily interested in finding a way out of political backwardness of international relations, would call “believing what they like”. He said humans have a wonderful capacity to believe what they like. If individuals enjoy this vice, still more are nations disposed to reinforce the agreeable view and patriotically shut out what does not suit.[5] Shutting out Bishop Deya may not be possible now because, we like it or not, he is there. But ODM has a dream. A dream of constitutionally replacing Kibaki. But if this dream ever comes true the party in a bubble has to take many damage control exercises. For example it has many brilliant people who should realise they ought not touch “bishop” Deya – even with a barge pole!
If ODM does not sever relationship with Deya at the earliest possible opportunity, it will in fact be swallowing a suicidal pill which he happens to be.







[1] Bourke, Fionnuala, ‘Queen and the Miracle Baby Bishop’ in Sunday Mercury of October 24, 2004.
[2] Mugonyi, David. ‘Kalonzo and Uhuru skip UK bonding trip’ in Daily Nation of March 9, 2007.

[3] Smith, Hedrick. The Power Game. (Random House). New York.1988.
[4] The Sunday Standard Number 1402 of March 4, 2007.
[5] Wesson , Robert G. The American Problem, (Abelard- Schuman.) London. 1963.

Kibaki's Election Spin Works!

An extremely effective clandestine attempt by Mwai Kibaki’s 2007 election campaigners to spin the infamous state organized invasion of The Standard that took place exactly a year ago out of front pages was magnificently executed two days ago. The spin doctoring operation almost worked like magic. The first anniversary of the worst mistake by a reigning President in an independent Kenya almost passed unnoticed because on the eve of the sad day – 1st March – the government announced a new salary structure for teachers.

It also announced the appointment of Prof. Njuguna Ndung’u as the new Governor of the Central Bank of Kenya. Kibaki’s obviously powerful spin doctors were making a desperate attempt to have all the front pages occupied by the new announcements instead of the poisonous story that would damage the President in this crucial election time. And indeed it almost worked!

On March 2nd the front pages of all the papers including The Standard’s splashed the teachers’ salaries stories. The state terrorism against The Standard which normally would have filled all the front pages with anti- Kibaki stories had to be dropped by all the papers except The Standard which used it as the second lead. Who is the real spin doctor for Mwai Kibaki? How much power does he or she have? Why don’t journalists see through this new and most devastating state weapon to lead the media institutions by their noses?

Someone in Kibaki’s campaign team understands the needs of the media in Kenya. He or she knows what makes good news. He or she knows, and may be understands, what news values are. He or she must be qualified journalist. If it is a team, then that team also intimately knows what newspaper deadlines are and how they affect “editionizing”. Targeting the first editions of all the newspapers the teachers’ salaries announcement was made very late in the evening to make journalists manipulate the front pages to accommodate the new hot story. Other inside pages had been done and the only room to accommodate the new story was on the front page. Chief subs had to revamp the front page and the invasion of The Standard anniversary story had to be spiked! In fact all other papers except The Standard spiked it. The dirty mission was accomplished!

The Standard invasion anniversary story would have sold but nothing sells better than teachers’ new salary structure. Teachers buy newspapers. The commercial sector was eager to know who the next governor of the Central Bank of Kenya would be. The bank is crucial to the economy of the country. The news was announced late in the evening to make sure the invasion of The Standard story would be killed! By the time the two news items were made public by someone extremely powerful in Kibaki’s government the story reminding the people of Kenya about the commandos who invaded The Standard a year ago was dead and buried.

A year ago when hooded police hooligans invaded and vandalized The Standard editorial offices and printing press, journalists in the country were united. They all condemned the invasion. The late announcements of a new Governor of the Central Bank and new salaries for teachers made every editor think of circulation wars. Both stories would sell more than the anniversary one.

The media fraternity and unity brought about by police cruelty seen at The Standard a year ago evaporated in thin air through the clever manipulation by Mwai Kibaki’s spin doctors. What brought journalists together last year was not relevant any more. Only circulation figures mattered now. The crisis at The Standard that made them comrades in arms no longer existed. The big question is: When they chose to forget The Standard crisis story were they making the right editorial judgement?

According to Leonard Downie Jr. and Robert G. Kaiser in their famous book The News about The News good journalism holds communities together in times of crisis, providing the information and the images that constitute shared experience. When disaster strikes, they say, the news media give readers and viewers something to hold on to – facts, but also explanation and discussion that can help people deal with the unexpected.[1]

The Michuki invasion of The Standard was the most unexpected blow to Kenyan journalism ever to be experienced since independence. Equally unexpected was the new spin capabilities that removed the story from all the front pages except that of The Standard which had an axe to grind with a pending case against the Government in court. Even in the case of The Standard the story was the second page one lead after the new pay for teachers’ splash.

One of the greatest disasters ever to happen to Mwai Kibaki’s regime was the state sponsored commando invasion of The Standard on the night of March 1st 2006. The foolish act gave the Government more negative publicity than even the Anglo Leasing scandal. Millions of Kenyans were glued to their TV sets as newspaper circulation figures were going through the roof. Foreign correspondents filed more copy than when Jomo Kenyatta, the first President died. The story was in demand in every part of the world where Africans are most despised. As a matter of fact in those circles it was used as proof that the black man was not ready for independence as he was incapable of respecting free speech – the pillar of democracy.

The threat to Press freedom in Kenya passed without political leaders’ serious concern. Parliament has yet to pass a vote of no confidence in at least the method used by John Michuki to “discipline” The Standard. In 1966 when a threat of different kind confronted major British newspapers , the matter become a subject of a serious debate in Parliament with useful contribution from the highest political office of the land – the Prime Minister himself. Commenting about the UK economic and technological crisis in his Newspaper Crisis, Harford Thomas says the British newspaper crisis has not only been generously documented, but fully debated. He tells us how the House of Commons and the House of Lords gave a full day to debates filling more than 120 pages of the official reports.[2] At that time the British politicians were very concerned with the imminent threat to press freedom there.

Thomas reminds us how the then Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, made a historic speech in the House of Commons by saying: “I start from the doctrine that a free and democratic country such as ours the British people need, are entitled to demand, a free press representing every point of view…If this is to be achieved this country needs, and is entitled to have, something like the present number o newspapers, national and local.” It is very difficult to imagine anyone in Kibaki’s administration defending free speech the way Wilson defended the British press four decades ago.

Instead of emulating the British admirable protection of press freedom, Kibaki’s ministers are the source of the threat against the media. Other members of Parliament, including Opposition leaders, are paddling in the same canoe. They too see the media in Kenya as a threat particularly when journalists call for the respect for values such as free and fair elections which may show them the door to the streets used by the unemployed outside Parliament.

It is indeed a paradox that Kibaki’s regime provided a red carpet reception to the IPI leaders and members when they met in Nairobi in May 2005. Seated among the cheering crowd at the Kenyatta International Conference Centre, I wondered whether the President meant what he was saying when he promised heaven on earth for Kenyan journalists and for the international correspondents based in Nairobi. I wondered whether Kibaki knew he was addressing people who as long ago as 1997 called the attention of the world to the “increasing harassment and persecution of the Press, radio and television in many countries around the world.”[3] If he did then he did not show any respect for those who sounded the warning because soon after his wonderful promise his minister, John Michuki, was doing exactly what the IPI was telling the world to guard against.

Recalling the IPI caution sounded at its General Assembly in Oslo in 1997, Kit Coppered says the warning reflected every kind of persecution from “butchering of journalists in South America to censorship of news and the feeding of flagrantly dishonest information to the media by governments in even the most liberal democracies of the Western world.”[4] Is that a familiar story in Kenya too? Don’t our political leaders in all the political parties – Kanu, Narc- Kenya, ODM and the rest of them tell blatant lies to journalists every time the truth is exposed? Every Kenyan knows the answer to that question which will be answered through the ballot in this year’s election.



[1] Downie Jr., Leonard and Kaiser, Robert G. The News About The News (Alfred A Knopf. New York. 2002)
[2] Thomas, Harford. Newspaper Crisis ( IPI, Zurich. 1967)
[3] Coppered, Kit. The Defence of Press Freedom ( IPI, London/ Zurich 1988)
[4] Ibid

No Primaries, No ODM!

When the idea of forming the Orange Democratic Party was first mooted soon after the referendum of 2005, political pundits knew that the Members of Parliament involved in the entire exercise were only building castles in the air. What had brought them together – the rejection of the so called Wako draft Constitution – could not possibly be maintained as a political entity. The political diversity among them was so wide and the people involved could not join hands as genuine political associates.

The Daily Nation front page exposé of January 24th by Bernard Namunane[1] claiming that there was tension in ODM came as no surprise therefore to anyone with the inside knowledge of the rivalry that has always characterized relationship between ODM-Kenya leaders.

According to The Standard of February 20th secret power sharing talks have been going on among leading presidential aspirants of the ODM-Kenya. During the talks leaders have been dishing out top Government jobs among themselves.[2] Very much like the leaders of Narc-Kenya, the ODM top brass seems to have very little time for the people. The two parties appear to be scared stiff of party elections as well as of going through primary elections to seek the people’s mandate to occupy top public offices in the country after this year’s polls.

Until such a time as the people are involved in determining who the real leaders of Narc- Kenya and ODM-Kenya are and who among them will be the presidential or prime ministerial candidates, the two entities will only remain elitist’s clubs of the privileged political class. Both parties appeal to the public for support on ethnic basis. When all is said and done ODM-K remains a party of the ethnic groups of the self appointed leaders carrying its flag in public meetings. Narc- Kenya is exactly the same. Demographically the two groups are more or less the same with a handful of minority nationalities still undecided and therefore vulnerable to grabs by the two giants.

Raila Odinga may be a very popular leader in every part of the country but he is the undisputed head of the Luo community. William Ruto may be a crowd puller in the Rift Valley but only the Nandi people follow him blindly. Kalonzo Musyoka’s charismatic qualities are recognized in almost all corners of the country but it is only among the Kamba people that whatever he says changes into unwritten law. The same equation could be formulated about Kibaki and the Kikuyus, Embus and Merus; Musalia Mudavadi and Luhyas, particularly the Kakamegas; and Marsden Madoka and the Taitas. Looked at in that manner, Uhuru Kenyatta, Najib Balala, Julia Ujiambo seem to have almost no following of any significance .

From the beginning of 2007 Kenya has been going through an invisible primary election even though proper democracy has not yet been introduced to any political party in the country. The big lesson the country has learnt is that a president who has been put in office without going through a primary election can be extremely difficult to control in terms of party discipline even when he fails to implement party policies as stated in his own manifesto before election. Mwai Kibaki is such a president. He has not bothered to respect any agreement made within Narc just before the 2002 election.

What he has thrown out of the window includes a memorandum of understanding (MoU) which would have reserved prime minister’s job for Raila Odinga and created a Summit to guide his leadership. Instead Kibaki has stuck to the provisions of the current constitution which make him and absolute despot, benevolent though he may be. Without a doubt Kibaki’s Government has achieved a lot – the revival of the Kenya Meat Commission, the Constituency Development Fund and free primary education just to name a few – but he has never operated under any party direction. Instead he chooses to be guided by a group of close business friends which includes extremely unpopular ex British home guard in the Mau Mau freedom struggle of the 1950s, John Michuki. With Michuki in Kibaki’s kitchen cabinet are the self made multi millionaire semi illiterate Njenga Karume and the real brain behind Kibaki’s political survival Joe Wanjui. What all these people have in common is that they come from the numerically and economically dominant Kikuyu ethnic group.

As ODM-K, the main group opposing Kibaki’s Presidency, organizes campaigns to try and nominate a presidential candidate all that Kibaki does is simply to announce that he intends to seek a second term. He never names a political party whose ticket would sponsor him. At least three parties – Narc-Kenya, the Democratic Party and Ford People – claim him as either their own candidate or the candidate they would support. It simply means that the problem of holding primary elections is more in ODM-K than any other party. In more than one way it is the problem which poses the greatest threat to party unity.

The big questions that remain unanswered now are: Can the elections be free and fair without proper primary elections in every political party? What does “free and fair” elections really mean? According to Jorgen Elkin “free and fair” has become the catchphrase of UN officials, journalists, politicians and political scientists alike. He poses a very thought provoking question when he digs deep to try to find out what actually constitutes “a free and fair election”. He wonders whether the phrase only means that the election was “acceptable” or whether it implies something more.[3] Looked at through various ODM constituencies primary elections cannot be “free and fair” because they cannot be “accepted” if certain candidates don’t emerge the winners. To the Luos only Raila is expected to win and to the Kambas the primaries will not be deemed “free and fair” if Kalonzo Musyoka does not win.

When ODM-K leaders travel across the country holding hands like brothers and sisters they claim to be before big crowds of voters, they are only misleading the public. Each one of them wants to use the party to be reelected to parliament and, if possible, become their own people’s presidential candidate. The primary motive of all legislators, as David Mayhew so appropriately puts it, is reelection and “the pursuit of this goal affects the way they behave and the way that they make public policy.”[4] Though Mayhew was writing about congressmen and women in America, his argument is applicable in the Kenyan situation today too.

Personal ambition of the ODM candidates can be seen clearly when they visit various parts of the country. While in Kisumu, Raila is cheered much more than any of his “brothers and sisters” and in Machakos, Kalonzo is the darling and hero of the people. The conventional perceptions that ODM is Kenya’s next government are diluted quite considerably when one looks at the disunity within it. All because of lack of properly organized primary elections which are democratic and transparent.

Experts examine primary elections in a number of ways. Two among these are most popular: An open primary election that allows a large number of voters to determine who the candidates will be and a closed primary election which allows only card carrying party members to do the same. Whether the planned delegates’ conference to elect an ODM presidential candidate will be an open or closed primary it is not clear as yet. What is clear at the moment is that nothing has been agreed on. ODM has not established any meaningful party caucus yet. It is indeed even more disturbing when a president seeks reelection without even naming the political party that will be his platform. May be time has come for the constitution to be changed to demand a mandatory primary election for every political party to be supervised by the electoral commission.




[1] Namunane, Bernard. ODM Tens ion , published on the front page of Saturday Nation No. 15362 .On February 24, 2007.
[2] ODM Power Formula , Published on the front page of The Standard of February 20. No. 27730.
[3] Elkit, Jorgen Want makes Elections Free and Fair published in Journal of Democracy Volume 8, Number 3, July 1997 pp. 32- 46. Published by John Hopkins University Press.
[4] Mayhew, David. Congress: The Electoral Connection , Yale University Press (2004)

The Ethics of Covering Free and Fair Elections

In covering the ongoing election campaigns for this year's polls expected to take place December, journalists are under a sharp public microscope which will critically examine their professional competence in ethical issues involving independence, freedom of the press, impartiality , fair play, decency , accuracy and responsibility. These are by no means the only ethical principles in the Kenyan code but they are the backbone issues which arguably were the first to be considered by the first authors of the American Society of Newspaper Editors in 1922. Since then these seven ethical principles have been used by many countries all other the word to shape up their own code.In my view if Kenyan journalists can just observe these original ethical principles while covering the 2007 elections they will be professional enough to claim to be upright.

According to one great editor, C.P. Scott , comment is free but facts are sacred and that is the one aspect of Kenyan journalism where the ethical importance of Impartiality will be put to test during the coverage of the current elections .These famous words by Scott are at times forgotten by Kenyan journalists when they ignore the vital question of separation of news from comment , or the religious avoidance of what in current usage is termed tendentiousness. Americans simply call it editorializing. Though Scott’s words have been classic, they tend to lose much of their force if divorced, as they commonly are , from their context.

What C.P.Scott said was :“The newspaper is of necessity something of a monopoly , and its first duty is to shun the temptations of monopoly. Its primary office is the gathering of news .At the peril of its soul it must see that the supply is not tainted .Neither in what it gives nor in what it does not give , nor in the mode of presentation , must the unclouded face of truth suffer wrong. Comment is free , facts are sacred. Propaganda , so called , by this means is hateful. The voice of opponents no less than of friends has a right to be heard. Comment is also justly subject to a self imposed restraint. It is well to be frank; it is even better to be fair.” According to yet another journalism scholar ,Wilson Harris, the highest canons of journalism could find no better definition than that.[1]

Yet even Harris admits that this is not quite all the story. He says the question how far it is the function of the Press to give the public what the public wants is still worth asking . Here , of course, the element must be considered. It is convenient to speak generally of the Press , but what is meant in fact is a number of individual newspapers , each of them intent on increasing its circulation at the expense of the others . In the current election campaign the odds are all in the paper that gives its readers what its readers want , as against a rival who gives them what it thinks they ought to have .

Despite the journalistic rules of impartiality , Kenyan readers have a special liking for editorialized presentation of news the way The People used to do when covering the 1997 elections .Note the following intro. of its front page lead at that time for example :

The writing is on the wall. It is either reforms
or anarchy. That is the loud and clear message
that the Kenyans have been beaming to President
Moi for the last couple of weeks , but like the
mean-spirited and stone -hearted Pharaoh of
ancient Egypt , he is unwilling to let the people
go .It is the biggest challenge he has so far faced.[2]

Impartiality has never prevented modern journalists from presenting their stories in an interpretative manner provided their interpretations are based on facts .Interpretative journalism becomes even more forceful when it is based on investigative powers .Most of the alternative newspapers in Kenya tend to ignore the ethical rule of impartiality; but their editorialized presentation of news is only popular among readers because it is based on well researched stories which are interpreted to the readers in a slanted manner to suit the convenience of the parties supported by the editors. Very often this crusading , and often biased , presentation of stories has landed a number of newspapers in very serious legal problems some of which seem to be more political than legal .

The Partisan Press

Many of the newspapers and magazines in Kenya’s alternative Press are naturally partisans ;but that should be no excuse for their blatant twisting of news to an extent that opinion becomes more prominent than facts. Obviously journalists anywhere in the world have plenty of opinion. But the profession is based on the idea that they can keep those opinions out of their stories .Very often journalists in the alternative Press and at times even those in the mainstream Press do less than a perfect job of it . Readers often see personal feelings intruding into their so-called hard news stories.

During the 1997 election The People was ordered by courts to pay Shs 10,000 to Joshua Kulei for alleging he was involved in corrupt practices with a Nairobi-based Asian businessmen.
If the alternative Press in Kenya appears to be rather weak on the ethical requirements of impartiality they are even weaker on Fair Play issue . Hardly ever are readers of the alternative publications, which make scathing attacks against almost all the political leaders in Kenya without giving them an opportunity to reply. Yet yet professional ethics demand the voice of the condemned leaders should also be heard. Ethically any accusation made by a newspaper outside a court of law should be balanced by opinions of those being accused.

The media in Kenya these days are full of anti Kibaki government stories published obviously with a view of making it extremely difficult to come back to power after the elections . Very often the accusations are legitimate since the papers publishing them are only playing their watchdog role of the Fourth Estate .But the manner in which the stories are presented to the people is unprofessional as it fails to observe the important ethical requirement of fair play. Stories accusing the government of all manner of things would sound more authentic if the accusations were balanced by comments of the accused, even if that comment was simply saying “no comment !”

It is easy for journalists in Kenya to be biased because they rub shoulders more often with opinionated politicians .It is also possible many of them don’t even know that being publicly biased is being unprofessional. The thrill of chasing an expose on a major corrupt practice within the Government could easily blind them to the fact that as professionals they must always make an attempt to see the their side of the coin.

Howard Kurtz ,the Press critic of the Washington Post says journalists’ real bias is bad news bias .They love conflict ,emotion ,charges and counter charges .A reporter who spends months chasing allegations of wrong doing sometimes finds his vision clouded by the thrill of the chase . One who spends too much time hanging out with cops and prosecutors may wind up thinking the same way , sometimes overlooking reckless conduct by his law enforcement buddies. A city council man who keeps feeding a reporter inside dope is less likely to become the object of harsh scrutiny .But that tendencies have more to do with mind-set than ideology.[3]

During the various times when our political leaders have pretended to be interested in working together to shape up a constitution that is acceptable to all Kenyans through dialogue the majority of Kenyan journalists were in favour of a meaningful dialogue. Many of them, including yours truly, said so publicly and in their columns .Much of their reporting on the issue of dialogue was expected to be biased either in content , tone , choice of language or prominence of play. This kind of bias was noticeable to any keen eye. It was natural therefore that when pro-dialogue groups held huge demonstrations throughout the capital city and other major towns of Kenya on July 7 ,1997, all the papers gave the event front page treatment it deserved as a major event. The point I want to make here in favour of Kenyan journalists is that despite the known latent bias among journalists favouring the Opposition stance of dialogue , no journalist took part in the demonstration as active participants.

This Kenyan episode contrasted sharply with another demonstration in the Spring of 1989, when 300,000 people marched in Washington for abortion rights .The demonstration turned into a journalists’ watershed because the marchers included a number of reporters and editors from New York Times , Washington Post, and other media organizations.[4]

According to Kurtz one of the demonstrators was Linda Greenhouse who covered the Supreme Court for the Times .Though she had had permission from her boss , Howell Raines , before taking part in the demonstration ,Greenhouse was later reprimanded for “violating New York Times policy” . Fairly or unfairly , those who join the news business give up certain rights . Matters that are routine for most citizens , such as signing petitions or contributing to political candidates , ought to be out of bounds for members of the Press. We ought to give ourselves the same standards to which we so rightly hold public officials , though no one should pretend that we are opinion-free .It is the parading of such opinion publicly that poses the danger of leading us into slippery professional slope.

Freelancers’ exposes

In Kenya survival of both the alternative and the mainstream media appears to depend heavily on exposes obtained from freelancers who are not necessarily reliable news gathers .Many are the times as the Managing Editor of the Daily Nation when the use of stories from such reporters landed me in courts facing serious libel lawsuits. Yet when all is said and done, it is natural for any truly independent newspaper , radio or television station to have a professionally healthy hunger for exposes . All I am suggesting is that that hunger must always be nurtured by the careful guard against reporters’ temptation to lie. This temptation intensifies and grows into an irresistible urge to mislead readers, viewers and listeners in favour of certain political leaders during election campaign time such us we are going through now. Pictures of favoured leaders appear on front pages of all newspapers in an almost daily basis. Sometimes these campaigns to boost the images of selected leaders become too obvious and one wonders whether they are being caused by bribery.

A close examination of Kenyan Press - both mainstream and the alternative - reveals that untruth can and does slip through editors’ fingers making it difficult to erect an airtight defense against lying reporters .Hence the need to check , and check all the facts before you put pen on paper. I knew of a news editor at Florida’s St. Petersburg Times who had a big poster above his head for all his reporters to see which said : “If your mother says she loves you check it out !”

Both the alternative and the mainstream Press in Kenya have little problem with Decency which is an important pillar of journalistic ethics . Be that as it may I will not be surprised at all when stories of private lives of powerful political candidates threatening to oust the incumbents are not published during this election campaign. The stories may go into details painting the prurient picture of the secret behaviours of some unfortunate political leaders. It has happened before in the Western world.

Practitioners and proprietors in the Western world are unable to agree on how to curb encroaching tendencies to use pornography as circulation boosters in down- market newspapers . The International Press Institute has become a stage for debate between those opposed to pornography and those backing it as a form of journalism. The latest worrying pornographic threat to communication has hit the Internet forcing Germany to make attempts to tame the Web. Writing about the “Internet Trials” in the Time magazine of July 14 , 1997 , Jordan Bonfate says the question of how to police the borderless realm of Internet has baffled jurists and legislators ever since the World Wide Web started its wild expansion in early 1990s.But regulation happy Germany , he says , was one of the first countries to try to patrol this twilight zone of information and entertainment , zealously extending existing criminal statutes to the Internet and sending in the cyber-sheriffs to go after the likes of Angela Marquardt and Felix Somm, both accused of providing access to home pages on the Web with illicit content. More obvious still , the Bundestag (then) passed Europe’s first comprehensive national Internet law.(Bonfate)

The new legislation defines responsibility for pornography and other potentially objectionable material appearing on computer screens , prescribes the rules of protecting the confidentiality of personal data and grants the world’s first licenses for “digital signatures”, a supposedly foolproof method of protecting commercial transactions on the Internet.[5]

Though the Internet has already entered the homes of the affluent in Kenya it has yet to pose a national crisis as a means to corrupt the youth of this country. The issue of decency on newspaper pages can be serious as there is a tendency on the part of at least one national newspaper to go down-market for circulation purposes. Given the eagerness noticeable among the young professionals enthusiastic to become proprietors of their own publications, I believe it will not take long before Kenya witnesses the birth of magazine specializing in prurient interests.

Admirable Journalism

Journalism in Kenya is among the most admirable on the continent of Africa but among its biggest problems facing it is how it could deal with inaccurate information .Accuracy has become a major professional concern among journalists all over the world ; but in Kenya it is a particularly serious problem because the country appear to be in short supply of reliable news sources even among official circles. The problem becomes more serious during the coverage of elections and the current elections are no exception. Yet a lot of what is published in Kenyan newspapers , like it is in the rest of the world, is second-hand information. Journalism scholar ,Curtis D. MacDougall , admits that most news gathered by reporters is second-hand but warns journalists to remember that news sources unquestionably are responsible for as many if not more news story errors than reporters. He even suggests that mistakes made by those giving out news may be intentional .[6]

The reporters’ weapons against inaccuracy ,as a result of news sources’ inability or unwillingness to give reliable information ,are verification and honesty of purpose. If a reporter approaches the task of both reporting and writing his story without prejudice ,whatever error he does make at least will be unintentional .Fairness and caution both require that ,when two persons interviewed differ greatly as to the truth , the statement of both should be included is the news story, .To achieve this objective , newspapers go to extremes of which the general public hardly dreams .The sentence saying that Mr. Smith could not be reached for a statement may have been added to a story many hours after futile efforts to attain either accuracy of fairness or both. (MacDougall)

The trouble with the Kenyan journalists trying to reach accuracy is that they are often dealing with people capable of making public statements and totally denying ever making them when they are in political or legal hot soup. Ten years ago the Ford Asili Chairman Kenneth Matiba told journalists he had resigned his Kaharu Parliamentary seat and promised to communicate his resignation to the Speaker of the National Assembly the next day[7].

But the next day Matiba disowned the story scapegoating the journalists who had written it. More than anywhere else in the world reporters in Kenya have to be extra careful because they are not only dealing with inaccurate , misleading and sometimes outright lying sources of information but with extremely ruthless laws that treat those who publish untruths very cruelly . The only answer for the true professionals is to be truly responsible journalists ready to publish the truth and be damned for it. Which brings me to the next most important pillar of journalistic ethics - Responsibility.

Whenever some of African despotic leaders talk about “responsible” journalism or Press they mean the journalism and Press they have in their pockets and therefore in their total control.

Misused Press

Newspapers , magazines radio and television stations in Africa have been used or misused to perpetuate the misrule of dictatorship ever since colonial powers gave way to African authoritarianism. And whenever there is a coup that replaces one dictator with another the first thing the rebellious soldiers go for is a radio station. African journalists have a much harder responsibility of upholding journalistic principles at the risk of not only being labeled traitors by the dictators but endangering their lives in so doing. The argument about whether journalists in this country are Kenyans or professionals first has been advanced by those in power when they appeal to practitioners to suppress important news in the name of patriotism .

In my opinion , journalists are more patriotic when they are guided by the truth and when they draw demarcation lines between right and wrong .Obviously for journalists to do this most effectively they must understand and master the functions of their profession. Holmgren and Norton tell us the way in which the individuals uses the media give us clues as to the functions of the media in society as a whole .[8]

If we consider the time when people spend on media ,we might conclude that most Kenyans have far more respect for news and information than for entertainment. Holmgren and Norton say people need a continuous survey of our environment, whether immediate or distant. They become uneasy if they don’t receive a stream of information ,however uneven ,about changes taking place on the horizon. More simply , this involves the reporting of news or presentation of information about our world and its people. We might call this watcher function of media ,and it is performed especially well by newspapers ,television ,radio and newsmagazines.( Holmgren and Norton ).

The two scholars also say the other functions of the media is that of providing us with a forum , a running series of arguments among rival views and personalities enabling people to reach a consensus about issues facing society. This is what Kenyan journalists shuld do when covering the current election campaigns.

The two scholars also explain other roles such as the teacher role of the media .Examined carefully it becomes easy to see that the real bosses of the professional journalists are the people rather than the government or media owners .Responsibility to a professional journalist should be total dedication to serve humanity by safeguarding freedoms of conscience , movement , assembly and association and through that process uphold freedom of expression .This calls for total professional commitment which many believe can only be achieved by devoted dadication to journalistic ethics upheld by independence ,freedom of the Press, impartiality, fair play, decency , accuracy and responsibility as discussed above.

A close look at how journalists perform their duty when covering the election campaigns in Kenya would reveal many violations which are not only confined to the alternative Press but sadly, the mainstream media as well. Kurtz reveals a whole range of ethical problems encountered by a media reporters all over the world and his revelation are startling. He lists pitfalls such as conflicts of interest , freebies , junkets , intellectual theft , deception , carelessness , kowtowing to advertisers , use of dubious evidence and outright bias. It is striking how often we in the news business fail to live up to the high minded standards that we prescribe for others .
















[1] Harris ,Wilson ,The Daily Press, Cambridge at the University Press,1949)
[2] “Reforms : Moi’s Biggest Test” in The People of July 11-17,1997 ( N0.228)
[3] Kurtz , Howard , Media Circus , Times Book Random House , New York , (1993.)
[4] Ibid.
[5] “The Internet Game” in Time Magazine Vol.150 No.2 page 28 ( July 14,1997)
[6] MacDougall ,Curtis Interpretative Reporting The Macmillan Company , New York. (1968)
[7] “Matiba Resigns” in East African Standard of May 31st 1997 ,front page (No.25826)
[8] Holmgren ,Rod and Norton, William , “A Look at Modern Media” in The Mass Media Book Prentice-Hall,Inc. Cliff, New Jersey, (1971).