Imanyara’s assassination claim is a hoax

Imanyara’s claim that there is a plot to kill him is a big joke. Assassins never write letters to their targeted victims to reveal their intentions. Like lightening they just strike. All they do is murder not write letters to people they intend to kill. The fact that there have been several political assassinations in independent Kenya, however, means the country is not short of hired killers. Wilfred Njenga’s letter to Imanyara must therefore be subjected to thorough investigations though the likelihood of Njenga being a fictitious non existent person is very real.

The allegations by Gitobu Imanyara appear to be a very well calculated practical joke meant to hurt the erratic First Lady, Lucy Kibaki, a sworn enemy of the Imenti Central MP and a woman called Mary Wambui. So far, the put-up job worked wonders because no sooner were the allegations made in Parliament than the livid lady reacted with a fury of an irritated mama who could do nothing short of making empty noise. Alas! The Gitobu hurtful but still unproved assertions were made in a House protected by absolute privilege and are, therefore, not actionable. Not even the First Lady can change that quandary.

Whether they are serious or a mere bunch of shaggy dog stories, the allegations by Imanyara are as humourless as they are sombre and should be thoroughly investigated to determine their source. Rather than ordering an investigation to pin down the authors of the fabricated letter received by Imanyara, State House shockingly reacted by saying that to reply to Imanyara’s claims “is to give credence to a reckless politician who should be focusing on national issue and not specializing on attacks on innocent citizens”. All the same State House went ahead and replied to Imanyara in an outburst of verbal diarrhea. Lucy Kibaki thinks Imanyara is the author of the made up letter. The statement from State House says: “The list that Imanyara tabled in Parliament clearly shows that it is his own creation.”

There are many reasons to make anyone believe Imanyara’s letter is fake. It claims Njenga is a member of the notorious police terror force known as Kwekwe which operates under Police Commissioner Major General Hussein Ali. The letter alleges that Ali had been summoned to State House by Lucy Kibaki and given orders to kill Imanyara, Paul Muite, Martha Karua and Bonny Khaluale. Whereas it is true the Kwekwe gangsters exist in the Police force and it is also true that Lucy Kibaki behaves quite erratically at times, like when she walked into the Nation Centre and physically attacked photographer Derek Clifford or when she publicly attacked Minister George Saitoti, it is inconceivable to imagine her summoning the Police Commissioner and ordering him to kill anyone, least of all a Member of Parliament of Imanyara’s prominence.

The Speaker of the National Assembly has promised to deliver a communication from the Chair on the matter next Wednesday and it is quite likely that a special Parliamentary Committee to investigate the whole issue may be established to examine the authenticity of the letter and its content. Most likely the Committee will conclude that the letter is a fake one and was only intended to raise false alarm and ridicule the First Lady. The authors of the letter, however, will be found to have committed a serious crime of misleading the entire Parliament by seeking cheap publicity for certain leaders including Imanyara himself. This however does not mean Imanyara knows anything more than what he has already told Parliament about the letter.

If a thorough investigation is made by the Parliamentary Committee that is likely to be formed, it will be found that someone is still after Ali’s blood and would like his Kwekwe squad debated in Parliament before he is finally fired. Someone would also like to have the First Lady exposed in Parliament as a person who is mentally challenged. Doing so successfully is most unlikely as the move is sure to face a formidable opposition from Kibaki loyalists in Parliament. There may also be complicated technical hurdles that must be cleared before such a debate can be contemplated. It is also a fact that Imanyara has an axe to grind with the First Lady who once slapped him at State House. The task before the committee does not appear to be enviable.

The inclusion of Mary Wambui in the alleged list of the hit men is a direct provocation of Lucy Kibaki. If there is a name of a woman that literally makes the First Lady go round the bend, that name is Mary Wambui, the alleged wife number two of the Head of State. Kibaki becomes extremely emotional when he denies any relationship with the woman who is said to be a mother of his illegitimate daughter. The drama that the country has witnessed from State House caused by Mary Wambui is what makes Wilfred Njenga’s letter even more ridiculous when he claims Lucy Kibaki wants the Police Commissioner eliminate the poor woman. The story is too thrilling to be true. The most spine-tingling tale of a jealous woman in love is simply meant to ridicule Lucy Kibaki.

Wilfred Njenga also involves the name of the Head of the Civil Service, Francis Muthaura, as one of the people giving orders for the assassinations. If there is a brilliant mind in the Kibaki Administration, it is that of Francis Muthaura, who is the real power behind Mwai Kibaki’s side of the coalition Government. Muthaura operates above board with the skills of a political wizard. Those who know him well say he can never plot anyone’s physical assassination. The mere mention of his name in Imanyara’s letter strengthens the suspicion that it is a hoax.

Whoever wrote Imanyara’s letter wanted to cause more chaos in the already chaotic Central Province .At the moment the situation in that part of Kenya resembles that of the State of Emergency during the Mau Mau rebellion. Murders are committed by the Mungiki terror gangsters who are fighting Government backed Kenda Kenda bunch of hooligans. If Wilfred Njenga’s letter comes from one of these two gangsters the chances of tracing the true authors are none. But this is where the exposure of the truth about the Imanyara letter is likely to be . The letter is most likely part and parcel of internal Kikuyu political animosity.

The other name implicated in the Njenga letter is that of John Michuki. This is the cleverest trick by the authors of the fictitious letter because Michuki has been implicated in ordering the police to cause trouble in the country. This he did when he planned the invasion of the Standard when hooded policemen terrorized journalists and vandalized their offices. At that time Michuki came out in the open and claimed responsibility for police terror at the Standard . Nothing has been more costly politically to Michuki than that incident which caused him a demotion in the Kibaki Cabinet. Nothing would make Michuki repeat the same mistake. The suggestion that he can summon the Police Commissioner and give him orders to kill Imanyara is as ridiculous as it is foolish. Michuki can be accused of many things but not of being foolish.

Uhuru’s car directive angers Minister

Uhuru's car directive has angered many Ministers. They don't want to give up their big limousines to fulfill Kenyatta’s budget proposals. Big cars are the country’s status symbols. The bigger one’s car is the more respected he becomes. It does not matter how the big cars are purchased. They could belong to thieves or notorious smugglers. The moment they are seen in villages or estates where the poorest people live, they become one of the most important qualifications to get elected to Parliament.

This rule is obeyed by everyone including Prime Minister Raila Odinga who was among the fist Kenyans to import the American Hammar to use as a campaign instrument in the last elections. Because of that car he was nicknamed Nyundo or hammer throughout the campaign. Hundreds of other politicians, seeking to gain Raila’s popularity, emulated him. Now everyone wants a Hammar or something even bigger.

If Uhuru insists on withdrawing the big cars from ministers, assistant ministers and permanent secretaries, it will not be surprising if a suggestion is soon made to sell the big cars at a throwaway price to the Ministers and other top civil servants and let them continue claiming mileage as they use the same cars which will then be their own personal private cars. Such a scenario will not be farfetched because they say they deserve payment for the use of private cars while on official duties. After all MPs claim mileage every time they visit their constituencies.

Kenyan Parliamentarians do not get elected to be servants of the people; they go to the August House to seek power and privileges accompanied by pomp and pageantry. Looking at the car park used by MPs in Parliament can be an extremely nauseating experience. Legislators compete on size and quality of cars they drive. Listening to their drivers debating on whose is the most expensive is like hearing kindergarten children arguing about the beauty of their toys. Yet Uhuru’s proposal is a serious matter and could benefit the country if it was given the seriousness it deserves by our leaders. And Uhuru should not have stopped at the car level. He should have taken a bolder stand and suggest the reduction of the many fictitious Ministries that impoverish the people of Kenya on a daily basis.

Obviously Uhuru could not be expected to take this stand alone. But then they say Kenya’s is collective Government or those in Government have a collective responsibility. Thus Uhuru’s Budget should have been collectively planned with the involvement of the two principals who should have jointly announced a cabinet reshuffle to reduce the number of Ministries soon after the Budget speech. If that happened then Kenyans would truly have believed the seriousness of reducing high Government expenditures.

Today every mwananchi knows the uselessness of a number of Ministries. Top on the list of the worthless ones is the Ministry of Nairobi Metropolitan Development. No matter how highfalutin the language to justify its existence becomes, it will still remain useless and a waste of public funds. Everything this Ministry is purported to do can be done by the Ministry of Local Governments and Uhuru should have had the courage to tell Raila and Kibaki that simple truth. Then, and only then, would he have deserved the praise he is getting now from the Parliamentarians.

The second useless Ministry is that of Regional Development Authorities whose work could also be done by the Ministry of Local Governments. The Government must not continue to cheat the wananchi that this fictitious Ministry is doing anything to the people. If there is any development that can take place in various regions of the country then it should emanate from the people who understand their own problems better than those sitting in Nairobi pretending to initiate development in the regions.

Uhuru should also have had the courage to suggest to the Principals that there is no need to have both the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources and the Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife. With the existence of these two Ministries simultaneously, one of them must be fictitious because, for all practical purposes, forestry and wildlife are part and parcel of natural resources. There is no need to pretend that the two perform different duties for political expediency.

The Ministry of Agriculture and that of Livestock Development are an obvious duplication and Uhuru should have joined them. The Ministry of Development of Northern Kenya and Other Arid Lands is the most hopeless public relations exercise that is definitely going to boomerang since the Ministry only exists on paper and is not even worth that paper it is written on. The Ministry was created to appease the increasing number of vocal anti Government Somalis who seem to be influenced by the dreaded Muslim fundamentalism. The only meaningful way of introducing development in the northern part of Kenya is to establish functioning Ministries that are both powerful and meaningful. Uhuru would have been a real hero if he pointed out that anomaly.

The Ministry of Special Programmes is as mysterious as the special programmes themselves. The Ministry is as fictitious as that of Gender and Children’s Affairs because every part of development in Kenya should include men, women and children and this should be a countrywide policy matter and not an issue of a Ministry created to silence vocal politicians. The creation of two ministries performing similar duties is proving to be an extremely expensive joke to the people. The classic example is that of the existence of the Ministry of Public Health and Sanitation as well as that of Medical Services. Wananchi would have forever been grateful to Uhuru if he took serious steps to join the two.

A lot of Money would also have been saved if the Ministry of Education would have been joined with that of Higher Education Science and Technology. The two actually do the same job and Uhuru’s frugality would have been more conspicuous if he joined the two. The move to cut down the number of Ministries, if it was backed by Raila and Kibaki, would also have made the coalition Government appear more serious in its endeavor to serve the people. Today everyone knows the main purpose of this Government is to create jobs for the most powerful personalities in ODM, ODM-K and PNU. Time has probably come to establish permanent Ministries that will remain unchanged for a long time.

Posted by I am a at 2:54 AM

Ringera Deserves More Powers

Justice Aarun Ringera has more enemies than the Devil himself. As the Director and Chief Executive of the Kenya Anti Corruption Commission, he has the most difficult task of digging up and exposing all the dirt in our society; but he has no powers to prosecute those responsible for the unscrupulous corruption and bribery that have now become part and parcel of life in Kenya .But as the most highly paid public servant, there are hundreds of exceedingly qualified lawyers who wish they were in his shoes; and thousands of thieves and crooks who simply wish he was dead. Yet everyone is expecting him to fight corruption even though he is without sufficient arms and ammunition to do so most effectively. Without prosecutorial powers given to him by law, blaming him for inefficiency or favouritism is simply being extremely unfair to the judge.

The enemies of Ringera who feel they are more qualified than him for the top anti corruption job will try to find faults with the manner in which he performs his duties. Some will go as far as accusing him of working with the very people he is supposed to expose. Indeed there is a pending libel case between him and the Standard newspaper which published a highly defamatory article about the judge on June 7^th this year. The article claimed Ringera was President Mwai Kibaki’s hand picked choice to head the anti corruption commission because he would always make sure that no step was taken to expose the real people behind the Anglo Leasing scandal. A week later the paper tried to substantiate the libelous article by accusing the judge and the Attorney General of doing nothing to win cases against Anglo Leasing thieves. The second article had a lot of innuendos.

The method of using defamatory libel to silence newspapers and stopping them from publishing exposes about powerful people is as old as newspaper industry itself. Be that as it may, bold journalists who have facts at their fingertips publish them in order to be damned. They normally use the defence of justification to get away with murder if indeed the facts in their stories can be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Since the writer of the libellous stories published by the Standard is Abdulahi Ahmednasir,who is one of the most respected lawyers in Kenya, it can safely be assumed that he published both the defamatory libel and the libel through innuendo deliberately knowing that he had quite a number of defences he could use in court. Now that Ringera has in fact sued, the defence of qualified privilege could also be used in defence of the newspaper because the matter is of great public interest.

My views about Ringera’s suit against the Standard notwithstanding, I still believe the man needs more powers to be more efficient. Sure enough he has exposed quite a number of important cases involving very eminent people in corruption. But he could not take the cases to court because he does not have prosecutorial powers. The Attorney General seems to think he is the only person, together with the Police working under him, who should have those powers. Without prosecutorial powers Ringera becomes impotent and he has admitted that much. Time has come for Parliament to pass appropriate laws to strengthen Ringera’s hand. Otherwise the whole business of fighting corruption becomes an exercise in futility.

Ringera’s enemies, who feel he earns too much money, simply want his job either for themselves or for their close relatives. The campaign to get rid of Ringera in order to get his fat salary will soon come out in the open with groups of people campaigning for their own men and women. With the spread of corruption in all parts of the country, scores of candidates will be sponsored simply to be used as shields against possible prosecution for corruption. The corrupt obviously want to have an equally corrupt head of the anti corruption Commission to protect them; and if he or she comes from a certain village, then the entire village will swim in the sea of corruption without any fear of either drowning or being exposed by the ACC.

Ringera’s job is in greater danger of vanishing when it is exposed to party politics and political competition between PNU and ODM. No matter how neutral Ringera claims to be, ODM will always see him as part of Gema and PNU. When they talk of equitable distribution of top jobs the director of anti corruption Commission is certainly one of the positions both parties will be fighting to acquire. The harm caused by the politicization of that post could be catastrophic to the country. Unfortunately whenever Ringera is discussed in Parliament in future, that temptation will always be there.

Whether Ringera keeps his job or not his office requires prosecutorial powers. As a matter of fact the Director of the anti corruption commission should have enough powers to prosecute the Attorney General himself if it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that the AG is indeed corrupt. Among the people who will fight Ringera tooth and nail are the corrupt people he is in the process of exposing. By getting rid of Ringera they remain free to do whatever they want in the expansive world of graft. Rather than rushing to court every time his job is challenged, however, Ringera would do better to engage in a fruitful exercise of public debate about corrupt powerful individuals.

Right now the anti corruption boss should join the Standard group of newspapers in exposing powerful Anglo Leasing personalities who have sued Kenya in European courts to get back the money which was returned to the Treasury. According to Martaha Karua one such case in Geneva has already been lost by the Attorney General. In other words, the Anglo Leasing racketeers are still at it and yet their names have never been exposed to the public. Rather than rushing to court to protect his job and reputation Ringera will win the public support he deserves if he can be courageous enough to name names of the real powerful people behind the Anglo Leasing scandal.

Election Massacre: We need two Tribunals

The perpetrators of the post election massacre are having sleepless nights. They know their days are numbered and soon will have to face justice, either here or at The Hague. If Kenya wants to make absolutely certain that no one escapes the long arm of the law, then we should have the conspirators behind the bloodbath tried at the ICC and the dogs of war who actually committed the murders, tried locally. Yes, it is possible to kill the two birds with a single stone. All that Kenyan leaders need to do is to make sure that we deliberately fail to meet the Kofi Annan August deadline so that his envelope can eventually land on Louis Moreno-Ocampo’s desk.

Very soon Minister Mutula Kilonzo will be meeting Moreno-Ocampo to familiarize himself with the international criminal procedures. He will obviously not travel all the way to Holland just to enjoy a cup of tea with the ICC prosecutor. The two will obviously be discussing the prosecution of the people in Kofi Anna’s envelope. It is not difficult to imagine the areas in which the two will see eye to eye and the areas in which they are bound to end up poles apart. 

If there is one thing in which everyone agrees – everyone including Raila Odinga, Mwai Kibaki, Mutula Kilonzo, Martha Karua, Gitobu Imanyara, Kofi Annan, Johnnie Carson and Barack Obama –  it is the fact that the culprits of the massacre must face the law.  All these people agree that the butchers of December 2007 must never be allowed to get away with the crimes they committed against innocent Kenyans. The areas of disagreement seem to concern only the timing of the trials. Local leaders want the trials to be conducted expeditiously; and the foreigners want the formal legal process initiated even more expeditiously. Immediately! In fact right now! 

Kenyans feel the same way but Mutula Kilonzo’s hands are tied. He cannot initiate the trials without the special tribunal. But to establish the tribunal, the Constitution has to be amended and a special Statute has to be legislated. Martha Karua tried to do so at the beginning of the year but she failed most miserably because Gitobu Imanyara proved to be a smoother operator in Parliament than the Kenyan Iron Lady. 

He organized MPs in such a formidable manner as to create deep rooted doubts against Government intentions. Karua’s two bills died before they were born. Unfortunately Mutula Kilonzo cannot establish a tribunal in Kenya without the Karua Bills. He simply cannot reinvent the wheel. So, most likely, he will not meet Annan’s deadline and The Hague will have no choice but to initiate their cases against the criminal conspirators that caused the unforgettable scenes of carnage, slaughter and massacre in Kenya at the end of last elections. It is believed that some of these schemers sit in the current coalition cabinet and they come from both PNU and ODM. It will therefore be a blessing in disguise to have them tried at The Hague where they have no influence what so ever.

 This time Mutula will have to use his entire gift of the gab to convince MPs that there was no ulterior motive in the Karua Bills. The first one, The Constitution of Kenya (Amendment) Bill, 2009, was so important that no special tribunal can be established in Kenya without it going through Parliament. If the Bill went through as planned by Karua, the special tribunal would have had exclusive jurisdiction in accordance with the Statute, to investigate, prosecute and determine cases against persons responsible for (a) genocide, gross violations of human rights, crimes against humanity; (b) such other crimes as would have been specified in the Statute, committed in Kenya in connection with the December, 2007 General Election. 

Secondly, the Bill made sure, for the avoidance of doubt, the provisions of the Statute were not deemed to be inconsistent with the Constitution. Thirdly, the Bill made sure that if there were any laws in conflict with the Statute, the provisions of the Statute prevailed and lastly the Bill made sure that the emended Constitution ceased to have effect upon the expiry of the Statute. In the Memorandum of Objects and Reasons Martha Karua stated that the Constitution Amendment Bill was the result of the deliberations of the National Accord and Reconciliation Committee formed after the political crisis triggered by the disputed elections held on 27th December, 2007. 

She explained the Committee held its deliberations under the auspices of the Panel of Eminent African Personalities comprising the former Secretary- General of the United Nations, His Excellency Kofi Annan, His Excellency Benjamin Mkapa, former President of the United Republic of Tanzania and Her Excellency Madam Graca Machel.The Bill was only seeking to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry into Post Election Violence submitted to the President on 16th October, 2008, popularly known as the Waki Report. 

Karua also explained that the Constitution amendment Bill was proposing to introduce a new section 3A to anchor the Statute establishing the Special Tribunal for Kenya in the Constitution in order to insulate the Tribunal against objections on grounds of unconstitutionality. There is no way in which Mutula can present a better legal argument except to explain to MPs that Martha Karua was right and the Constitution still needs to be amended to establish a special local tribunal. 

Karua’s second Bill, rejected by Imanyara and his powerful group in Parliament, The Special Tribunal for Kenya Bill, 2009, will have to be presented to Parliament the second time by Mutula Kilonzo. In the Memorandum of Objects and Reasons, Karua explains that this Bill  was also seeking to implement the recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry into Post Election Violence submitted to the President on the 16ht October, 2008 also known as the Waki Report. 

The Bill proposed the establishment of a Special Tribunal for Kenya which would have sought accountability against persons bearing the greatest responsibility for crimes,particularly crimes against humanity, relating to the 2007 General Elections in Kenya.She explained that the Bill set out the procedure for the appointment of judges of the Tribunal, the Prosecutor, Registrar, Defence counsel and Special Magistrate. It also specified the Crimes to be prosecuted by the Tribunal. 

The Bill also contained financial provisions in respect of the Tribunal and provided for the sources from which the funds would have been drawn. Clause 59 provided for the establishment of that. Clause 60 required annual estimates on the revenue and expenditure of the Tribunal to be prepared prior to the commencement of the financial year of the Tribunal. Clause 64 required the Tribunal to prepare and submit a report on its work to the President and the Prime Minister. The Minister was required to table the report of the Tribunal before the National Assembly within fourteen days of its submission. 

Mutula is not likely to change Martha’s Bills in any way, shape or form and the sooner he brings them back to Parliament the better it will be for everyone. This time MPs will probably prove to be wiser, shrewder and more astute with enough intelligence not to allow themselves to be blindly swayed by Gitobu Imanyara who obviously has an axe to grind in this matter.

Uhuru’s Budget was a gift to MPs

Uhuru Kenyatta will go down in history as the first Finance Minister to make a laughable blunder by reading a page twice while making his budget speech and then quickly correcting himself by the use of one Swahili word: “Tuelewane!” –   Lets understand one another. Instead of laughing at the first President’s son, MPs were pleasantly amused because the Minister was repeating the part of the Budget they liked to hear most – that from now on so much money will be pumped into their constituencies, and that they will be able to build the most important roads in remote places they came from. To the MPs this was their Budget. The Budget they have been waiting for. The Budget that would boost their ego and make their Parliamentary seats— which happen to be their gold mines – very secure. 

Blunder or no blunder, Uhuru’s Budget was instantaneously accepted so overwhelmingly that when he finished, he was literally mobbed by fellow MPs from all the political parties to be congratulated with warm hand-shakes and even bear-hugs. It was finally a most triumphant achievement by the Minister who, only a short while ago, had to publicly apologize to the nation for a very serious “typing error” in his supplementary estimate of the same budget. All the previous sins by Uhuru Kenyatta were forgotten and MPs were almost unanimous in accepting the fact the Gatundu MP’s Budget was one of the best since independence. 

If there was anyone who was plotting to embarrass Uhuru and his PNU wing of the Government, under whose jurisdiction the Treasury falls, then that scheme had to be swept under the carpet as too many people were too pleased with the Finance Minister to entertain any criticism of the Budget immediately after his speech. In the impromptu comments MPs normally make to journalists’ symposium interviews after all Budget speeches, they all heaped up loads of praise for the Minister. Only Chris Okemo of ODM,  a former Finance Minister, wondered how the Government was planning to implement Uhuru’s beautiful proposals. 

Very often ministers’ plans for allocating resources are described as rich men’s Budget or the people’s Budget depending on what tax measures the Government takes to raise money form the people. If there is a suitable description for Uhuru’s Budget then the most appropriate one for it would be a Budget for the MPs. Pumping money into their constituencies is giving them the most powerful weapon for the 2012 elections. They will now have a story to tell the voters when they face their opponents. If the Minister’s plan works, the MPs will have roads, schools and dispensaries to show to the electorates as the fruits of their labour. No one can make them reject Uhuru’s budgetary proposals. 

Just before the Budget speech was read there was such a serious tension in the House that the possibility of Uhuru getting his proposals accepted smoothly was extremely remote. To begin with the House did not have a leader of Government Business and it would not have been far fetched to imagine ODM arm-twisting PNU to get that position by threatening to shoot the Budget down. Now that possibility is very remote as the Budget has turned out to be too good to be true to the Parliamentarians. But as Chris Okemo says, the biggest test for both the Government and MPs is on how to implement the Uhuru proposals. Even more important will be the question of how to keep nepotism and corruption from all the development plans proposed by the new Budget. 

So far the money entrusted to MPs as CDF cannot be said to be used without corruption and nepotism. A lot of noise has been made about the composition of constituency development committees; but the noise has constantly fallen on the Government’s deaf ears. Among the people misusing the CDF must be some very powerful sacred cows who so far have escaped Aaron Ringera’s ostensible sharp eye. When the CDFs were first introduced good proposals of auditing them were made. But the proposals seem to have vanished in thin air.  If there has been any corruption in CDFs then the possibility of that corruption spreading into the new schemes announced by Uhuru Kenyatta is very real indeed. MPs will convince the people of Kenya that they really mean well when they discuss openly about how to cover such loopholes during the debate that will follow the Budget speech. 

The significance of Uhuru’s Budget is that it encompasses both economic and political issues. It puts, for example, a huge amount of money to finance reforms and other Agenda Four issues while introducing far reaching policy subjects of concern with serious political implications. Ordinarily these are the changes associated with ODM rather than PNU policies. If ODM leaders heard of the policy changes involving devolution for the first time during the Minister’s speech then they certainly were caught with their pants down and it will be extremely difficult for them to oppose Uhuru’s proposals for the sake of opposition. 

If on the other hand the Budget is a result of a joint consultation between Raila and Kibaki, then it will sail through Parliament like lightening. The trouble is that the Treasury is a very PNU part of the Government and the success of the Uhuru Budget is likely to be seen as a feather in the cap of PNU. When Prime Minister Raila Odinga makes a lot of noise about being kept in the dark while important policy issues are being determined, he has a point. If he wasn’t consulted on the policy issues introduced by Uhuru’s unique Budget, then he cannot be expected to coordinate its implementation comfortably. 

On the other hand PNU can claim it was only providing funds to finance well defined policies found in the Raila-Kibaki Accord. Either way this is the one Budget that will find very few critics in Parliament. Its biggest challenge will be its effective implementation with the expected high standard of efficiency and transparency. Politicizing the Budget and supporting or opposing it on the basis of loyalty to ODM or PNU will be the most unfortunate thing to happen in Parliament. But in Kenya, anything is possible.

 

The shame of politics at funerals

Funerals are powerful political platforms. In history, in literature and in Kenya, funeral orations have built and destroyed many a politician. Yet the most vital question that Kenyans should now answer is whether time has not come to stop throwing mud at each other’s faces at funerals. This is because Kenya today enjoys unprecedented freedom of expression and there is no need what so ever for disrespecting the deceased people being buried by turning their final farewells into battlegrounds for political gains.

The burial of the late Vice President Kijana Wamalwa’s mother, Mama Esther Nekesa, was a case in point. Martha Karua and Bifwoli Wakoli used the occasion to attack Premiere Raila Odinga and President Kibaki for tearing the country apart. But were the furious words from the two disgruntled politicians really necessary at that time? Was the funeral of the departed soul of an innocent old woman really the appropriate place to wash dirty linen? The behaviour of Karua and Wakoli must have made Kijana Wamalwa turn in his grave because his mother, most certainly, deserved much more respect than the two politicians showed her as she was being buried.

In general, there are a lot of disgusting misbehaviors in Kenyan funerals. Some go there just to have a good time in all sorts of festivities which include dancing, boozing, feasting and, believe it or not, even fornicating. These are all obsolete primitive customs which should rightfully belong to the dustbin of history. Unfortunately Kenyan politicians will be the last to agree with me; and their motives are suspects.

There are times when funerals have to be politicized especially when the people being buried are victims of political assassinations. For this reason it would have been impossible to stop Mark Antony from talking politics at Julius Caesar’s funeral. Likewise burying Tom Mboya, J.M. Kariuki and Pio Gama Pinto had to be politicized. But Mama Nekesa was assassinated by no one; and as a mother of one of the most respected politicians, she deserved a more courteous and decent sendoff than what Martha Karua and Bifwoli Wakoli gave her.

Paradoxically, funeral orations in Kenya were popularized by Raila’s own father, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, but he had a very good reason to politicize funerals because he was banned by his powerful political enemies from addressing any crowd without a licence. Being a firebrand he was, he made sure he attended as many funerals as possible to spread his anti-government philosophies. Jaramogi’s tactic worked wonders and it was emulated by all Kenyan politicians including his own son Raila who was among the people targeted for attack at Mama Nekesa’s funeral.

The politicians who attacked Kibaki and Raila leadership would have been forgiven if they had no other political platforms. Unfortunately these are the same people who make Parliament adjourn prematurely due to lack of quorum. What they were after at the old mama’s funeral was cheap publicity while campaigning for the 2012 elections. Unfortunately both the time and place for electioneering was terribly wrong.

Of the two politicians, Wakoli is likely to benefit more from his outbursts before the President and the Prime Minister. The majority of the people at the funeral came from his home area and they would regard whoever challenged the Prime Minister and the President publicly a real local hero. Unfortunately the same cannot be said about Martha Karua.

To her people of Central Province, insulting Kibaki publicly in Luhya land will be taken as a terrible mistake to make. If she hoped to become popular among the Luhya people in her 2012 presidential ambition she also made another terrible miscalculation because the most respected Luhya leader present at the funeral was Musalia Mudavadi who condemned her misbehaviour. In any case the two politicians who made fools of themselves at the funeral are in for a big shock when they seek people’s mandate in 2012.

To begin with, the majority of voters in 2012 will be the most frustrated youths in the country who will be voting for the first time. Most of them will have had some form of education but with no chance of any employment. They will also be the most erudite voters Kenya has had in history. Most likely they will not be influenced by tribalism and maybe, more than at any other time in the past, they will scrutinize party manifestos to choose the political group to back. Unfortunately for Martha Karua her party Narc Kenya is most unpopular among the people she was addressing at the funeral.

Narc Kenya is virtually unknown in the part of the world from where she was attacking Kibaki and Raila. Her aggressive verbal assault could therefore never have been intended to make any gainful benefit apart from personally injuring President Kibaki. If that was her only aim, then she succeed immensely because the President was indeed deeply wounded and his angry face could be seen by all Kenyans who heard him say: “This is now too much!”

Between the two there is no love lost. When she quit the cabinet claiming the President was not serious about reforms, she did not quite reveal what had angered her so much as to abandon one of the most powerful positions in the current Government as the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs. Her real reason was because she had been bypassed and overlooked when the President appointed Uhuru Kenyatta one of the Deputy Prime Ministers in Kenya. For that, she has never forgiven Mwai Kibaki and to annoy him she started moving closer to Raila Odinga without quite joining hands with him.

The shameful ridiculing of the President and the Prime Minister at Kijana Wamalwa’s mother’s funeral was also uncalled for because the two leaders deserve respect in public. The habit of recklessly heckling at politicians in public is also abhorred by the people of Kenya and that is why they refused to join a handful of hooligans who tried to do so at the Nyayo Stadium during this year’s Madaraka Day celebrations. At that time the President called the hecklers “pumbavus” and the people simply laughed the matter off. If the politicians over dramatize and politicize funeral orations, they may very well qualify to be described by the same word used by the President on Madaraka Day.

PM’s Question Time must not be wasted

Speaker Kenneth Marende will soon make a directive about the shape and form of Prime Minister’s Question time (PMQs) and, like in previous occasions, his decision will be both binding and final. It is also likely to be historic. It will be an important decision because even though PMQs is in the new Standing Orders of Parliament, MPs have not quite understood what to do with the time Raila Odinga is given to establish dialogue with them. According to Number 10.gov.uk, the official site of the British Prime Minister’s office:

Prime Minister’s Question Time (often referred to as PMQs) is an opportunity for MPs from all parties to question the PM on any subject.It lasts for about 30 minutes and usually focuses on the key issues of the day.The PM answers questions every week that Parliament is in session - so for about two hours per month. This is twice as long as his chief cabinet colleagues or their junior ministers.PMQs were introduced fairly recently, in 1961, after a successful experiment while Harold Macmillan was Prime Minister.The half-hour session starts with a routine question from an MP about the Prime Minister’s engagements.Following the PM’s reply, the questioning member can put a supplementary question about anything relating to the PM’s duties or any aspect of Government policy.

That explanation from UK could be used by our Parliament to make sure that Kenya’s PMQs is utilized for the sake of improving our democracy rather than for an unhealthy opportunity to create a platform for meaningless party debates on who is the most powerful person in Kenya’s legislature. The PMQs should be a time when Raila is given an opportunity to elaborate Government policy on many issues which, very often, are confused with petty party rivalries. So far, Kenya has benefited quite a lot when Prime Minister Raila Odinga is given an opportunity to make such an elaboration.

The latest example concerns the findings of the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights, Prof. Philip Alston on extrajudicial killing in Kenya. Soon after the professor’s report was published, which condemns Kenya as a trigger happy nation, PNU was up in arms. It rubbished the report’s recommendations to fire Police Commissioner Hussein Ali and to have the Attorney General Amos Wako tender his resignation. The first stand taken by the PNU part of the Government was to protect the two men who everyone in Kenya knows have plenty of skeletons in their cupboards. One is heading the force that has literally slaughtered hundreds of Kenyans and the other has made sure that that crime will always be committed with impunity.

When Prof. Alston presented his report at a United Nations human rights hearing in Geneva on June 3^rd, PNU team composed of Ministers Mutula Kilonzo and George Saitoti was prepared for a rebuttal to save Kenya’s name and political image in a manner similar to that of all other African despots accused of violation of human rights i.e. simply deny the accusation and accuse the accusers of ignorance and evil intentions. This is the method used by the dictator of Sudan, Omar Al- Bashir, who is despised by all the freedom-loving people of the world for the despicable genocide in Darfur. Kenya was about to be lumped together with Al-Bashir’s Sudan, when Raila Odinga salvaged the situation.

He did so by sending a powerful team of ODM Ministers composed of James Orengo and Amason Kingi who must have knocked some sense into the conceited minds of the PNU ministers and made them accept the fact that there are some very brutal police killings that take place in Kenya which are normally executed with impunity. Internationally, that step made the world take an about turn position towards Kenya’s human rights records. If that record was bad, as indeed everyone knows it to be, then at least the Kenyan leadership owned the sad situation and accepted the fact that some drastic measures needed to be taken to remedy the horrible situation.

It was Raila’s quick action, together with the ODM policy on human rights, which saved the situation. The Prime Minister’s Question time should be taken with the same Geneva attitude that replace a lot of nonsensical PNU policies that protect criminals, with sensible policies that seek truth and justice for the people of Kenya. As it were, there are a lot of Kenyan Government policies that are caught up in the PNU-ODM confused rivalry and someone sensible must lead the way the Geneva style. PMQs must also be used to seek Raila’s guidance on Government policies towards a number of controversial issues concerning land, corruption and reforms.

For the first time in a long period both the Prime Minister and the President seemed to be speaking the same language on Madaraka Day when they promised the people of Kenya to bring about the reforms in the country as soon as possible. Most of the reforms concern the Police force and the Judiciary. The tone set by the two leaders on Madaraka Day should be followed up in Parliament during the PMQs.

What, for example, is the true Government policy concerning the resettlement of people now living in Mau forest? Listening to the Minister for Agriculture, William Ruto, on that issue, for example, one can clearly see that he seems to contradict himself many times depending on which audience he is addressing. When he talks to environmentalists he calls for the resettlements of the people now occupying the rain forests; and when he talks to the people living in the forest he asks them to ignore all calls to resettle them. That contradiction can be avoided through PMQs interrogations.

The current coalition Government has contradicted itself on many policy issues which continue to confuse the people of Kenya. Take the issue of corruption, for example. Every time PNU leaders talk about the sensitive subject, they become loudest when the corruption they are trying to expose concerns ODM personalities. They like to talk loudly about the maize scandal because they believe those involved with the scandal are either ODM leaders or their close relatives.

Likewise the ODM leaders become extremely strident and vociferous when they talk about Anglo Leasing scandal because they believe someone very close to Kibaki is involved. Whereas it is extremely healthy for the two parties to operate as people’s watchdogs in examining each other’s evil deeds, the exercise can be counterproductive when it is not based on well defined policies concerning the desired goals. Those policies can be defined at the PMQs.

The reason the current PMQs has not been as popular as it was expected to be is that it has taken the shape and form of ordinary Parliamentary question time when MPs query Ministers about their activities. Questions are normally submitted to the Ministers in a written form and answers are given in similar manner. Supplementary questions are then asked based on the answers given by Ministers. For the time being the Prime Minister’s questions are asked in the same format and so far they appear to be handled in the same manner as other ordinary questions for Ministers. Thus the Kenyan PMQs has tended to be a bit boring and certainly not as lively as the British one. Policies are not examined in as thorough a manner as they are supposed to.People disagreeing with the the PM have not been given time to express their views more emphatically.

Though Mr. Marende will have the final word on this matter I believe the Kenyan PMQs time should be devoted to Government policies on current hot issues where there is a lot of confusion and contradiction. In other words, the PMQs should be based in the hottest issue where the Government policy appears to be vague or confused. The media should also be given an opportunity to take part in debating the issue. For that matter , whatever the Prime Minister is going to talk about should be known well in advance by the whole country for at least three days in advance. Then the views of all political schools of thought should be examined publicly before the Prime Minister takes the flour of the House to give the official Government stand before he is interrogated by MPs. That way the debate will be lively and healthy for Kenya’s democracy.