Constitution: Kalenjins in leadership crisis

There is a serious leadership crisis among the most powerful ethnic group in the Rift Valley. The Kalenjins are now divided into smaller ethnic subgroups because their leaders took different stands in the just concluded referendum. As the country welcomes the new Constitution in happiness and unity, the Kalenjins are torn apart and not quite sure whether to be joyful or sad about the latest development in the country.

A very large number of them, in fact well over one million people, were mobilized by their leaders to reject the Proposed Constitution. Now the very same leaders are making a lot of noise to be included in the Constitution Implementation Oversight Committee (CIOC); and to have some Kalenjins in the Commission on the Implementation of the Constitution (CIC). The Commission will be made up of experts who will really be doing the donkey’s work in drafting the new legislation to be enacted by Parliament to enable a smooth operationalization of the new constitution.

The decision to have some Kalenjins included in CIC will be that of the President and the Prime Minister following the advice of the strong team of technocrats who have so far given the two principals very wise counsel that has tended to unite, rather than divide, the country. If there will be any Kalenjin in the CIC it will depend entirely on the credentials of the individual concerned. The community has many distinguished lawyers who obviously qualify to be members of the CIC. What Kibaki and Raila will be looking for are experts that will expedite the process of drafting the required legislation instead of rocking the boat to please certain political leaders.

Whether or not there will be a Kalenjin in the CIOC will depend on the powerful political parties in Parliament – the ODM and PNU. So far there is a threat to exclude the Kalenjins who opposed the Proposed Constitution, which means the Kalenjins who will sit in the CIOC will come from the group that supported the Proposed Constitution which includes Sally Kosgei, Helen Sambili and Franklin Bett.

These are the three leaders who tried to unite the Kalenjins to back the Proposed Constitution like the rest of the country. They are also likely to end up holding top leadership positions either as Senators or Governors of the new counties that have been formed in the Rift Valley. The political tug-of-war in the former Rift Valley will now change with time, giving the supporters of the new Constitution prominent positions in the new set up.

It should not be hard for the million Kalenjins to determine who among their leaders is telling them the truth this time. It so happens that since independence they have been grouped together and made to take joint political decisions based entirely on the pronouncement of individuals with their own political ambition and greed in mind. First they were made to join the Kenya African Democratic Union by Daniel Toroitich arap Moi log before independence. When independence was achieved they had a powerful Rift Valley region which they had to dismantle when Moi decided to join the Kenya African National Union under Jomo Kenyatta.

Moi, as the undisputed leader of the Kalenjins since 1957 when he first represented them in the Legislative Council which was commonly known as Legco , has made his people follow him blindly even when he was making wrong political decisions. In 2002 when he stepped down as the Head of State he led his entire community to back Uhuru Kenyatta, who was his handpicked contestant, as the presidential candidate for the Kenya African National Union. Though Uhuru managed to get well over 1.8 million votes, Mwai Kibaki of the National Rainbow Coalition was elected President with more than 3.6 million votes. Kalenjins were on the wrong side of history because of Moi.

Be that as it may, there is probably no single Kalenjin leader who has done more for his people than Daniel arap Moi who built many schools and roads in the Kalenjin Rift Valley as opposed to the Pokot, Masai, Samburu or Turkana Rift Valley. Using his powers as the President of Kenya, Moi made sure at least three national Universities – Moi University, Egerton University and Kabarak University-- were established in the Kalenjin Rift Valley. This elevated his people to a level where they can today scholastically challenge other ethnic groups such as the Kikuyus and Luos who have been exposed to education for a longer period.

Despite such a big contribution by Daniel arap Moi to the welfare of the Kalenjin community, they decided to ignore him in 2007 elections when he advised them to vote for Mwai Kibaki of PNU instead of Raila Odinga of Orange Democratic Party (ODM). At that time the Kalenjins followed the leadership of a young vibrant politician, William Ruto, who literally pulled the whole community away from Moi into the ODM where he strongly backed Raila Odinga. Unfortunately the Raila- Ruto relationship did not last long and the Kalenjin community was massively pulled out of ODM’s stand to support “YES” group in the just ended referendum into the “NO” team led by William Ruto.

When the “NO” team was badly defeated the Kalenjins found themselves in the wrong side of history yet again. This time they have very serious problem to overcome. To begin with Daniel arap Moi had made the Kalenjin erroneously believe the entire Rift Valley belonged to them. This belief was unfortunately enforced by the stand taken by William Ruto as the new leader of the Kalenjins during the referendum campaign.

The implementation of the new Constitution has opened the Kalenjin’s eyes to the truth which reveals that the Rift Valley belongs to other communities as much as it belongs to them. The new Constitution divides the massive Rift Valley into 14 counties, out of which only seven could be considered to belong to the Kalenjins.

Besides that, the dominant Kalenjin sub tribes of Nandi and Kipsigis find themselves in two different counties while other Kalenjin sub tribes of Elgeyos and the Marakwets are now in yet another county. Pokots, who were normally grouped together with the Kalenjins, are now in their own county. In other words the new Constitution has divided the Kalenjins in smaller counties in which the sub tribes will have to determine their own destinies in a new set up.

Obviously the new arrangement annoys Daniel arap Moi who sees the fruits of his entire political career going down the drain. The new setup will also see the Kalenjins seeking new leaders from their own sub tribes who will end up either in the Senate or as Governors of the seven major Kalenjin counties. In the County of Trans Nzoia, for example, there is likely to be a very tough fight between the only Kalenjin leader of the area, Joshua Kituny, and the two local Luhya leaders Eugene Wamalwa and Noah Wekesa. Between these three one may remain as a member of the less prestigious National Assembly while the other two occupy the Senate and governorship positions respectively.

Eugene Wamalwa, who has declared some interest in the presidency of the country, may change is mind after discovering the race is for bigger giants and end up seeking a seat in the Senate. Between Wekesa and Kituny the fight for governorship would see the Kalenjin losing to the majority Luhyas of the county which overwhelmingly supported the Proposed Constitution.

In Uasin Gishu where William Ruto is most popular the fight for governorship will probably be between the MP for Eldoret South, Peris Chepchumba and the MP for Eldoret East, Margaret Kamar. Ruto, who will be fighting for the Presidency may sponsor a younger candidates for the Senate seat. In the Elgeyo-Marakwet County the fight for the Senate seat will be between several giants.

These will probably be the MP for Marakwet West, Boaz Kaino, the MP for Marakwet East, Linah Jebi Kilimo, the MP for Keiyo South, Jackson Kiptanui and the MP for Keiyo North, Lucas Chepkitony. In that race may be the revitalized Nicholas Biwott is likely to show up again and try his luck in the new contest. The seat for the Governorship of the Uasin Gishu county will be contested between the many professionals from the area who are likely to leave Nairobi to go back home in the rich rural area to seek new leadership positions .

May be the hottest contest for the Senate will be fought in Nandi County where the MP for Emgwen, Elijah Langat is likely to be challenged by the MP for Aldai, Sally Kosgei , who is likely to be joined in the race by the MP for Mosop, David Koech and the MP for Tinderet, Henry Kosgey. The county’s Governorship is likely to see a bitter struggle between the candidates named above who may decide to leave the hotly contested Senate seat. But the new top job of the County is also likely to attract new faces of top Nandi businessmen, academicians, civil servants and professionals who are sure to join the bitter struggle.

In Baringo the Senate seat, like that of the new Governor is bound to attract the MP for Baringo Central, Sammy Mwaita, the MP for Baringo North, William Kipkiror , the MP for Baringo East , Asman Kamama, MP for Mogotio, Helen Sambili and the MP for Eldama Ravine , Mosses Lesonet. This scenario is likely to be repeated in the Kericho County where the MP for Kipkalion, Kiprono Magerer, the MP for Ainamoi, Benjamin Langat, MP for Buret, Franklin Bett and the MP for Belgut, Charles Keter, will battle it out for the two seats.

In the Bomet County the scenario is likely to be repeated when the MP for Chepalungu, Isaac Ruto is likely to fight the MP for Bomet, Beatrice Kones, MP for Konoin, Julius Kones and MP for Sotik Joyce Laboso for the same two seats.

Given the fact that the above developments are inevitable, the Kalenjins are about to start bitter confrontations for Senate representation and for the governorships of the seven counties. A healthy competition of developing the new counties is likely to come up with new leaderships associated with economic development rather than political ambitions of individual politicians. Whatever the case may be the Kalenjin today are about to undergo a major leadership change to join the rest of the country in accepting the new Constitution for Kenya.

Constitution: Catholics fighting losing battle

The Catholic Church in Kenya is fighting a losing battle. It has taken the most uncompromising stand of continuing to oppose the new Constitution of Kenya even when millions of Kenyans have ratified it. The Church hopes that something can still be done to amend the Constitution before its promulgation on the August 27. But the Church knows very well it is building castles in the air.

In a statement by 25 Bishops issued on July 28 at the peak of the campaign for and against the Proposed Constitution the Catholic Church clearly said: “We cannot place our hopes on the fact that the document can be amended after the referendum. Looking at the proposed draft however, amending this document will be an enormous task.”

To try and convince as many Catholics as possible to vote “NO” the Bishops explained to the believers about popular amendment which, they acknowledged, would require one million signatures of registered voters. They explained in their own press statement that amendment bill must be approved by the majority of 47 counties. The Bishop’s statement continued to explain to the believers that after the approval by the majority of 47 counties the amendment would then be tabled in the two houses of parliament before being submitted to the people for another referendum.

After this explanation the Bishops then concluded: “This process cannot take place before counties are in existence, and they will only exist in this country after the 2012 general elections.” So when the Bishops make so much noise now and continue to demand amendments well after the ratification of the Proposed Constitution they know very well that all that they can achieve is cheap publicity which will not change the will of the people.

Yet the Catholic Church in Kenya is extremely powerful. It has millions of converts who are scattered all over the country. The Church’s contribution to the country’s educational and heath matters has earned it respect everywhere even among non Catholics. Catholic universities, schools, like their hospitals in many parts of the country, are full of students and patients of the Muslim and other religious faiths. The official word from the Catholic Church carries a lot of weight in Government circles and many other institutions. It is therefore most amazing that the command from Kenya Episcopal Conference to everyone who could hear them to reject the Proposed Constitution was overwhelmingly rejected itself. Among those who rejected it are millions of Catholic believers.

Because of the continued complaints by the country’s most powerful religious institution a lot of Kenyans will probably look at the nature of the demands by the Catholic Church to see if they merit any consideration. In the statement of July 28 the Bishop said: “Brothers and Sisters, we have raised our concerns about Article 26(4) which by other written laws opens the gates to abortion on demand. The life of a person begins at conception, and unborn babies are therefore human beings, and have a right to life and this document declares that in essence, legislators and “health professionals” should have a free hand in ending the lives of these human beings.”

The Bishops must be very eager to know why their passionate appeal to their own followers was rejected with such a forceful disgust. The rejection by the Catholic flock of the demand from their own Bishops to throw the Proposed Constitution into the dustbin of history has revealed for the first time that Kenyans cannot be led blindly by the use of ecclesiastic powers. Whereas the respect for the Catholic Church is unquestionable everywhere in the country, its attempt to mislead the people, for whatever reasons, is greeted with hostility if the people suspect the Church is misleading them.

In this particular case the use of the words “open gates to abortion on demand” by the Bishops did go down very well with the people who must have read Article 26 (4) for themselves. That specific Article in the new Constitution says: “Abortion is not permitted unless, in the opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by
any other written law.” After evaluating the truth in their Bishops’ statement and comparing it with what is actually provided for in the Constitution, Catholic voters decided to back the Constitution.

Rather than taking a confrontational and adversarial stand against the Government and demanding an immediate amendment to the new Constitution , the Catholic Bishops would do very well to try and convince their own flock, which seems to be against the firm stand the religious leaders are taking, to see their point of view. After all it is the ordinary people within the Catholic Church who are faced with the problem of life threatening pregnancies which require urgent medical attention. They still need a lot of persuasion to put what their religious leaders say into practice.

The other aspect of the new Constitution which disturbs the Catholic Bishops concerns the Kadhi courts. The Bishops say: “We have also raised other areas of concern that this constitution fails to safeguard. These include the EQUALITY of all persons and creeds under the law, which the entrenching of Kadhi’s courts in the constitution denies. We have no problem with our Muslim brothers and sisters exercising their religious freedom. All we wish is that it be done in equity, by pursuing what has been done the world over, through an act of parliament, and for this we made specific proposals to the Committee of Experts.”

The Catholic Church must have seriously disturbed its flock when it said the new Constitution did not safeguard “equality of all persons and creeds under the law”. To find out whether their Bishops were indeed telling the truth the Catholic believers and voters must have looked at Article 27 which deals with Equality and freedom from discrimination. To their amazement the Catholic voters must have been shocked when they discovered the new Constitution says that every person is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law.

The Catholics voters must have been even more shocked when they found out the new Constitution says that equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and fundamental freedoms giving women and men the right to equal treatment, including the right to equal opportunities in political, economic, cultural and social spheres. This realization must have been a major contributing factor to their rejection of the call from their Bishops and instead strengthened their determination to ratify the proposed Constitution which is now sure to be the supreme law of the land.

When the Catholic Church tells its flock that the inclusion of Kadhi courts in the Constitution discriminates against Christians the believers must be wondering who is telling the truth because the new Constitution clearly says the State shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against any person on any ground, including race, sex, pregnancy,
marital status, health status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, dress, language or birth.

As a major institution that runs universities, schools and hospitals throughout the country the Catholic Church must really be aware of the fact that Muslims in Kenya have been marginalized for a very long time. People with Islamic names have been ejected in many Christian schools.

Recognizing the Kadhi courts through an act of Parliament, as the Church suggests, is a sure way of repealing that law at the first available opportunity, given the fact the very word Muslim creates a stigmatized situation that makes some true Kenyans with Muslim names being segregated from various aspects of society. The only way to protect the Kadhi court is to make them part of the Judiciary in the Constitution. They are, after all, very subordinate courts that deal only with personal matters of marriage, divorce and inheritance.

Refusing the Muslims the right to have their own Kadhi courts would be discriminating against them. The new Constitution says a person shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against another person on any of the grounds specified above. The Catholic Church must be very worried about the plans of the new Constitution to take legislative and other measures, including affirmative action programmes and policies designed to redress any disadvantage suffered by individuals or groups because of past discrimination.

This means Catholic schools and universities cannot deny Muslims and other Christians any opportunity to study or teach. During the campaign a story was published in one of the local dailies exposing the dismissal of a lecturer at the Catholic University for threatening to vote “YES” for the proposed Constitution. Such behaviour will never be tolerated by the new Constitution.

Catholic voters must have wondered whether their Church was telling the truth when it claimed the inclusion of the Kadhi courts in the Constitution amounted to “elevation of one religious over another”. This allegation was not supported by the new Constitution which clearly says in Article 32 on Freedom of Conscience, Religion, beliefs and Opinion that every person has the right to freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief and opinion. It also says that every person has the right, either individually or in community with others, in public or in private, to manifest any religion or belief through worship, practice, teaching or observance, including observance of a day of worship.

When the Catholic voters realized that the new Constitution says a person may not be denied access to any institution, employment or facility, or the enjoyment of any right, because of the person’s belief or religion they realized that their religion, like all others, was protected by the new Constitution which also says a person shall not be compelled to act, or engage in any act, that is contrary to the person’s belief or religion. One of the reasons the Proposed Constitution was accepted by such a big number of voters is the fact that millions of Catholic voters supported it. Catholic Bishops still opposing the new Constitution are fighting a losing battle.

Constitution: Amendment almost impossible

A lot of noise is being made by the people who rejected the Proposed Constitution about the need to amend the new Constitution before it is implemented. Doing so will be illegal and unconstitutional. The wise among the proponents of amendments have called for amendments to be made constitutionally. But that, according to Nzamba Kitonga, the chairman of the CoE, will take at least ten years.

For the Constitution to be amended according to its own stipulated procedure its Articles 255,256 and 257 must be followed. These are very cumbersome procedures that are deliberately designed to take a long time so as to give everyone ample opportunity to weigh the pros and cons of amending the new Constitution. When William Ruto and the NCCK leaders talk of following the stipulated methods of amending the new Constitution, they appear to be reasonable. Unfortunately the Catholic Church seems to be impatient and wants the amendment done immediately. Whatever steps the Government takes the law must be followed in the manner six million Kenyans chose.

Article 255(1) says amendment to the new Constitution shall be enacted according to Parliamentary initiative or by popular initiative and approved by referendum if the amendment relates to the supremacy of the new Constitution ; the territory of Kenya; the sovereignty of the people; the national values and principles of governance which include patriotism, national unity, sharing and devolution of power, the rule of law, democracy and participation of the people; human dignity, equity, social justice, inclusiveness, equality, human rights, non-discrimination and protection of the marginalized; good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability; and sustainable development.

Amendment must also be approved by referendum if they relate to the Bill of Rights;
the term of office of the President; the independence of the Judiciary and the commissions and independent offices to which Chapter Fifteen applies; the functions of Parliament; the objects, principles and structure of devolved government; or the provisions of the Chapter on amendment.

According to Article 255(2) a proposed amendment shall be approved by a referendum under clause (1) if at least twenty per cent of the registered voters in each of at least half of the counties vote in the referendum; and the amendment is supported by a simple majority of the citizens voting in the referendum.

An amendment to the New Constitution that does not relate to a matters specified above shall be enacted either by Parliament, in accordance with Article 256, which deals with amendment through Parliamentary initiative; or by the people and Parliament, in accordance with Article 257 which deals with amendment by popular initiative.

Article 256 (5) says if a Bill to amend this Constitution proposes an amendment relating to a matter specified in Article 255 (1) the President shall, before assenting to the Bill, request the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission to conduct, within ninety days, a national referendum for approval of the Bill; and within thirty days after the chairperson of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission has certified to the President that the Bill has been approved in accordance with Article 255 (2), the President shall assent to the Bill and cause it to be published.

The new Constitution can also be amended by popular initiative by collecting a million signatures from registered voters and then make a general suggestion about the amendment or draft a bill. The new Constitution says if a popular initiative is in the form of a general suggestion, the promoters of that popular initiative shall formulate it into a draft Bill and then deliver the draft Bill and the supporting signatures to the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, which shall verify that the initiative is supported by at least one million registered voters.

It also says if the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission is satisfied that the initiative meets the requirements of Article 257, which deals with amendment through popular initiative, the Commission shall then submit the draft Bill to each county assembly for consideration within three months after the date it was submitted by the Commission.

The Constitution adds that if a county assembly approves the draft Bill within three
months after the date it was submitted by the Commission, the Speaker of the county assembly shall deliver a copy of the draft Bill jointly to the Speakers of the two Houses of Parliament, with a certificate that the county assembly has approved it. If a draft Bill has been approved by a majority of the county assemblies, it shall be introduced in Parliament without delay; and then a Bill under Article 257 is passed by Parliament if supported by a majority of the members of each House. The new Constitution then explains if Parliament passes the Bill, it shall be submitted to the President for assent in accordance with Articles 256 (4) and (5).

But the new Constitution explains if either House of Parliament fails to pass the Bill, or the Bill relates to a matter specified in 255 (1), the proposed amendment shall be submitted to the people in a referendum.

All these parts of the new Constitution prove that Nzamba Kitonga is right that it may take well over ten years before it is amended. One important aspect about the amendment of the new Constitution is it involves the new set up of Parliament with two new chambers which have yet to be established. William Ruto and his church friends know very well that some parts of the new Constitution they want amended are among those that require the approval of national referendum.

Since the new Constitution will be with us for a very long time to come, it is prudent for all Kenyans to learn to live with it. This is why even though there is a very good reason to bar William Ruto and his friends from participating in the implementation process, way must be found of involving the “NO” group in the task ahead. Weather they like it or not all Kenyans have to accept the new Constitution as it is or else wait until all institutions needed to amend it have been established and then start the grueling job of fowling the right procedure to amend it.

There is little doubt that the people who said “NO” to the Proposed Constitution don’t like the developments in the country at the moment. Some of them are well known mischief makers. It is therefore very important to keep a very close watch on what their next step will be like. Some of them may engage in activities that will make implementation of the new Constitution extremely difficult.

The special cabinet team that will be looking at the implementation process has closed the door to the Ministers who said “NO” to the Proposed Constitution. The temptation by Parliamentary Select Committee to be known as the Constitution Implementation Oversight Committee (CIOC) to do the same will be high, but MPs would be advised to look at the spirit of the new Constitution and what it says about inclusiveness. The Commission on the Implementation of the Constitution (CIC) however will demand the services of experts who genuinely want to help this country frame the various legislations of the new Constitution without any hidden motive.

Following the well known Lyndon Johnson tactic of keeping close to one’s enemies, Prime Minister Raila Odinga and President Mwai Kibaki must have concluded it is safer to have William Ruto in the Cabinet, where they can exercise some form of control over him, rather than fire him and let him cause serious damage when he is plotting against the Government and the new Constitution from the outside. Using that tactic Lyndon Johnson refused to fire the dread FBI boss Edgar Hoover and when he was asked why the American President said it is “better to have him inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in.”

MPs should think of that clever tactic before locking William Ruto completely out of CIOC.

Constitution: Amendment seekers torn apart

The “NO” team is now torn apart. The unity they had that brought together Kalenjins, Kurias, Mberees, Kambas, and various church groups has now totally disintegrated. William Ruto’s thanksgiving luncheon organized at the Arboretum on Saturday 14th August spilled the beans that exposed the fact that the fragile unity that made them share platforms in various parts of the country condemning the Proposed Constitution has finally evaporated. Not a single church leader attended the celebrations which indicated a rift has now erupted between the churches and William Ruto.

The “NO” team was in fact composed of people who rejected the Proposed Constitution for very different reasons. The rich in it, which included Daniel arap Moi and William Ruto, were only opposed to the Propose Constitution because of its land chapter which will introduce justice to land matters to the benefit of all Kenyans. The Catholics were more disturbed by the Article in the Bill of Rights concerning the right to life, which, unfortunately they chose to misinterpret. The mainstream protestant churches were not happy with the provisions on the Kadhi courts, which they also misinterpreted.

The evangelical churches were opposed to the Kadhi courts because they were told to do so by American conservative rightist churches that wanted to fight President Barack Obama in his father’s land. The American churches have confessed that they paid a lot of money to the Kenyan evangelical churches to reject the Proposed Constitution. The Americans misinterpreted the Proposed Constitution by suggesting that Kadhi courts would open doors to Muslim fundamentalism in Kenya. Because they wanted to monetarily benefit from the Americans , the Kenyan evangelical church leaders never correct the situation.

The Mberees and Kurias opposed the Proposed Constitution because it did not create counties for them in the same manner as in the Harmonized Draft of 17th November 2009. The Kambas opposed the Proposed Constitution because they believed doing so would create a more conducive political atmosphere for the Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka. With the benefit of the hindsight of recent events it appears the Kamba strategy worked wonders and earned Kalonzo the leadership of Government Business in Parliament which comes with the chairmanship of the powerful House Business Committee. (HBC)

Now that the result of the referendum are known the groups in the “NO” camp have gone back to their various institutions and tribal groupings to licking their wounds separately. The disintegration became clear on August 5th when the Minister for Higher Education, William Ruto, was among the first, without consulting the churches, to concede defeat and appealed for urgent steps to amend the new Constitution. The move by Ruto must have angered the churches who boycotted his thanksgiving luncheon.

In a statement issued on the 11th of August after deliberations at the Jumuia Conference and Country Home in Limuru the NCCK said that it trusted that the Government leadership would fulfill the promises they made during the referendum campaigns that the contentious issues were acknowledged and would be resolved after the referendum. But the NCCK was quick to add: “We at the NCCK undertake to contribute fully to all the efforts made to resolve these issues using the mechanisms provided for in the new Constitution.”

Though the NCCK believes that “the amendment of the contentious issues will and should be part of the implementation process”, they realize that that will not be possible in the near future and may in fact take as long as ten years which the chairman of the CoE, Nzamba Kitonga revealed was the shortest period possible before any amendment of the new Constitution can be contemplated.

Apart from that the NCCK usage of term “Contentious Issues” is erroneous as it does not agree with the interpretation of the CoE’s meaning of the term in the context of the Proposed Constitution. According to the experts the contentious issues of the Proposed Constitution only concerned the Executive and Legislature; the devolution of powers and bringing the new Constitution into effect as it is described in the transitional clauses. At no time during the long period that Kenyans have devoted to the debate on the need for a new constitution were Kadhi courts, land issues or abortion officially considered to be contentious issues.

The Nzamba Kitonga team did not exclude the Kadhi courts, land and abortion issues from the list of the three officially accepted contentious issues out of malice. The team went through a very thorough legal scrutiny of various proposed constitutions to determine what was universally accepted as contentious issues. Apart from that, the Constitution of Kenya Review Act of 2008 mandated the CoE to identify the contentious issues, making the NCCK definition of contentious issues illegal.

Having been mandated by the law to identify the contentious issues the CoE took a lot of trouble to examine a very wide rage of Kenyans’ views before listing the three official contentious issues in the Proposed Constitution. They started by scrutinizing various draft constitutions that have come in existence as Kenyans debated on constitution. These included the Constitution of Kenya Review Commission Draft of 2002; the Draft Constitution of Kenya of 2004 which was popularly known as the Bomas Draft; and the Proposed Constitution of 2005.

Before identifying the real contentious issues the Nzamba Kitonga team also studied the views expressed by Kenyans as collected and collated by the Constitution of Kenya Review Commission of Prof. Yash Pal Ghai and then examined documents reflecting political agreement on critical constitutional questions such as the Naivasha Accord. The Nzamba Kitonga team looked at both the Kriegler and Waki reports and then examined thoroughly the various memoranda on the same subject submitted to the CoE. After a rigorous debate among themselves the CoE unanimously agreed on the three contentious issues named above.

The contentious issues named by the churches and the rich land owners are therefore fake ones. They should not be taken seriously by those who will have the responsibility of implementing the new Constitution. If however Kenyans in future, which is after at least ten years from today, want to amend the new Constitution the procedure to follow is very well documented in the new Constitution.

What Kenyans cannot stomach is the continued demand to have the new Constitution amended before it is promulgated, which is a legal impossibility. When the people demanding the amendment of the new Constitution claim they want to do so through the stipulated method in it, they are not being honest. If they were all honestly concerned about the implementation of the new Constitution in an inclusive manner then they would keep quiet for the time being, wait until the new Constitution is promulgated and see how it is actually operationalised. Then they would have good reasons to call for amendments, if those reasons will still be valid ten years from today.

Today they are only engaging is a face saving exercise to save the institutions they head. Unfortunately for them, the referendum has taught Kenyans a great lesson: That they are the real bosses in Kenya and what they want becomes the law. As far as the Constitution they want is concerned, they have already spoken. Very loudly indeed.

Constitution: Ruto’s lies haunt him

William Ruto is in a lot of trouble. He went round the country castigating the Proposed Constitution by the use of blatant lies and against the wishes of his party ODM. Now the party is not only threatening to discipline him, but is also recommending his dismissal from the Cabinet where he serves as the Minister for Higher Education. Whether Prime Minister Raila Odinga and President Mwai Kibaki will be influenced by ODM and show Ruto the door remains to be seen.

Whatever happens he cannot deny that he told the people of Kenya the Proposed Constitution will allow homosexuals to marry partners of the same sex. Yet the Proposed Constitution says in Article 45(2) that every person has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex based on the free consent of the parties. The question Raila Odinga and Mwai Kibaki should ask themselves before forgiving Ruto is how many people, particularly the Kalenjins who take every word spoken by Ruto as gospel truth, voted against the Proposed Constitution based on the lies on gay marriages?

Can a person who publicly lied against the Proposed Constitution to suit his own personal gains be trusted to work in a major parliamentary committee charged with the responsibility of implementing the New Constitution? If William Ruto truly believed every word he publicly said about the Proposed Constitution, he should be the last one to offer his services in the implementation committee.

Apart from the lies he told his own people about same sex marriages, Ruto told an even more serious lie to the Kalenjins, which must have made them reject the Proposed Constitution en masse. He publicly told his tribesmen and women that all the land they own would be confiscated by the Government if they accepted the Proposed Constitution.

Many Kalenjins voted “NO” believing the New Constitution would not respect the private land they individually own. Yet the New Constitution clearly describes private land in Article 64 (a) which say private land consist of registered land held by any person under any free hold tenure or land held by any person under leasehold tenure or any other land declared private land under and Act of Parliament.

The over a million Kalenjins who rejected the Proposed Constitution did so believing Kibaki and Raila’s Government was about to confiscate their private land and yet the truth of the matter the very opposite was the real situation because the New Constitution protects all the Kalenjin land owned individually or collectively as a community. The lies that Ruto told to the Kalenjins and made them reject the Proposed Constitution have angered his ODM party which has now closed all doors leading to implementation committees for William Ruto.

Ruto went round the country telling everyone to reject the Proposed Constitution because it would facilitate abortion on demand for pregnant mothers yet Article 26 (4) of the New Constitution also very clearly says abortion is not permitted unless, in the opinion of a trained health professional, there is need for emergency treatment, or the life or health of the mother is in danger, or if permitted by any other written law.

During the campaigns for and against the Proposed Constitution William Ruto deliberately misled the people of Kenya and managed to get well over two million people on his side. That was a very serious damage he made to the efforts of getting this nation a new constitution. Should he be rewarded for his efforts by being included into the Parliamentary committee that will oversee the implementation of the New Constitution?

ODM as a party to which William Ruto belongs says no. Yet there are others who believe he should be included in that vital committee for the sake of national unity during this time. But the big question is: Has William Ruto changed or is he still working against the New Constitution?

During the campaign for and against the Proposed Constitution William Ruto went to the Coast and up at North Eastern Province where there are a lot of Muslims and told them if they backed the Proposed Constitution there would be serious confrontation between Muslims and Christians. Fortunately the Muslims at the Coast and at the North Eastern provinces did not take Ruto seriously and that is why they overwhelmingly supported the Proposed Constitution backed by millions of Christians.

They knew William Ruto’s efforts to drive a wedge between Muslims and Christians was an extremely serious crime which would have led this country into a bloodbath that would have made the post 2007 election conflict look like a Christmas party. Should such a person be cajoled by being offered a lucrative position in an important committee meant to bring about love and peace through the implementation of the New Constitution?

Millions of Christians ignored William Ruto when he told them to reject the Proposed Constitution because of the inclusion of the Kadhi courts in it. His argument was that the Kadhi courts in the Constitution would make Islam superior to Christianity and would lead to the spread of Islam and Muslim fundamentalism throughout the country.

Ruto knew he was lying when he was spreading his anti Islam propaganda because, as an educated person, he knew the New Constitution has established Kadhi courts for purposes of only personal laws for Muslims and that as part of the Judiciary they are only subordinate courts that cannot be used for evangelistic purposes to spread either Islam or Muslim fundamentalism. Yet Ruto made many reject the Proposed Constitution through this misconception of the Kadhi courts.

When going round the country castigating the Proposed Constitution William Ruto, Cyrus Jirongo and Daniel arap Moi never told the people the truth about the real reasons for their vehement opposition to the Proposed Constitution. Now that it has been ratified by Kenyans some of the real reasons are beginning to come out in bits and pieces. Pushed against the wall, Moi, for instance, says he still hopes there will be an early effort to amend the New Constitution’s chapters dealing with land and counties. The question is why is Moi, strongly backed by Ruto, so concerned about these chapters to the extent of telling lies about a document which they know would do a lot of good to the people of Kenya?

The answer to that question lies in the ownership of huge tracts of land and how it was acquired. When Moi was the President he used to dish out land to his cronies and family members right left and centre. Among the beneficiaries were Ruto and Jirongo. The manner in which Moi distributed land was quite unjust to the ordinary people of Kenya. The New Constitution promises to correct that anomaly. Moi is also quite agitated by the new creation counties in the Rift Valley which he believes should remain as one unit belonging to the Kalenjins.

Now there are new counties there which will be in the hands of people other than Kalenjins including, for example, Kajiado and Narok which will be controlled by the Masai people, which does not disturb Mio so much; but Nakuru and Laikipia, which may end up in Kikuyu hands and disturbs the former President quite a lot. Deep inside, Moi is a Kalenjin nationalist who believes the Rift Valley belongs to the Kalenjins – an error which the New Constitution corrects with the consent of over six million Kenyans.

Constitution: Kalonzo’s new responsibility

Kalonzo Musyoka will go down in history as a man who played two important roles when the country needed him. The first role was when he became the Vice President of the Republic of Kenya in 2008 when the country was in turmoil. Kenya had just gone through the most controversial general election with no clear winner. President Kibaki became the most unpopular person for swearing himself secretly to serve a second term against the will of Raila Odinga’s supporters who believed they had won the election. Kibaki desperately needed a number two to serve the country as the Vice President. That person, as fate had it, was Kalonzo Musyoka.

The second time when Kalonzo Musyoka finds himself in a hot, but extremely important national seat, at an extremely crucial time in Kenya’s history, is now. He has just been appointed by both President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga, to serve as the Leader of Government Business in the Legislature where there are scores of laws to be passed in support of the new Constitution. Kalonzo will also be the boss of the House Business Committee, which will be the engine of the entire legislative process.

In any language, this is an extremely heavy responsibility for a man who was swaying between “YES” and “NO” camps to such an extent that he almost made half of his Kamba people reject the Proposed Constitution. But then Kalonzo is popularly known by his people as Wiper, that part of a car on a windscreen that moves left and right in any rainy day.

Kalonzo’s Wiper signifies the left and right movements of a sea of arms of huge crowds that cheer him up whenever he appears before them. Paradoxically, whenever William Ruto, the de facto leader of the opponents of the Proposed Constitution, went to Ukambani to seek support for the rejection of the Proposed Constitution, he took “greetings”, some would say instructions, from “Wiper” to the people. Those “greetings” may have been the main reason for the large number of Kamba people’s rejection of the Proposed Constitution.

Kalonzo’s Wiper doctrine has been the politics of indecision in the Kibaki-Raila tug of war. During the 2007 election campaigns he used to tell his supporters that he would let Raila fight Kibaki and Kibaki fight Raila, but in the end he would just pass in the middle of the two fighting top leaders of Kenya and walk straight into real leadership. In a way that is what happened in 2008 when he was appointed the Vice President of Kenya to the great disappointment of Raila Odinga, who categorically refused to occupy the third position after Kibaki and Kalonzo. Raila’s anger was so strong that in the end the Constitution of Kenya had to be amended to create the position of a Prime Minister who shared powers with the President on equal basis.

Today there is no doubt that Raila is Kalonzo’s boss and the latter’s appointment to become the Leader of Government Business in the Legislature had to be done with the approval of the former. All the same Kalonzo’s Wiper politics, which make him move his policies like a pendulum, have paid some dividend this time. During the campaign for and against the Proposed Constitution he used to go to churches and tell the clergy not to weaken their position of rejecting the Proposed Constitution, and then join President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga to tell the wananchi to support the Proposed Constitution – a very wiper-like political movement indeed!

The Kalonzo wiper political philosophy is beginning to pay some other dividends also. His pendulum movements to and from the “YES” and “NO” camps makes him singularly the most qualified person to bring together the two warring teams at a time when the country desperately needs to be united as the new Constitution is being implemented. The outcome of the whole exercise is bound to secure the name of Kalonzo Musyoka a very significant position in the history books as it boosts his image as national hero in preparation for the 2012 general election.

His Presidential candidature is sure to get the backing of the Churches, the Kamba people and the Kalenjins, if William Ruto will be his running mate. The only trouble is the unity between Raila Odinga and Mwai Kibaki is become dangerously close to the detriment of any other Presidential candidate apart from Agwambo himself. It will, therefore, not be surprised at all if Kibaki repays the Prime Minister by declaring “Raila Tosho” just before the next general elections.

The just ended referendum for the new Constitution has changed the political scenario and the game on the chessboard quite considerably. From now on the whole game will be played differently as the two major political parties – ODM and PNU – are getting closer and closer every single day. The importance of the Prime Minister and the President appointing Kalonzo Musyoka the Leader of Government Business at this time is to bring the ODM-K in that gigantic union. The question may be asked: If Kibaki endorses Raila as the next President of Kenya, what happens to other contenders such as Martha Karua, George Saitoti and Moses Wetangula who have all shown interest in Kenya’s topmost job?

The answer to that question is that Kenyan politicians get into politics simply to make money. The manner they almost sabotaged the referendum by refusing to adjourn the House unless their salaries were increased attests to that notion. In future they will simply join a political party that may appoint them to the lucrative positions of Secretaries who will head ministries instead of Ministers.

It is not beyond Kenyan politicians to establish political alliances that will simply create jobs for themselves. The rebirth of the first Kenya African National Union , KANU ,which was formed by Tom Mboya , James Gichuru, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga and Joseph Otiende, and united mainly Kikuyu and Luos, to liberate Kenya from colonialism , is about to take place as Luos and Kikuyus are about to once again unite . The difference is that this time the unity will be necessitated by the sole purpose of trading horses to secure top jobs in the new Government to be formed under the new Constitution.

This new unity may see the merger of ODM and PNU and if Kalonzo thinks there is anything for him and for the Kamba people to gain, it may even include ODM-K. The endorsement of Raila Odinga as the next President may come with a firm undertaking that he will appoint certain people to key cabinet positions which will automatically be ratified by a Parliament made up of a strong political party that may be formed through the unity of ODM, ODM-K and PNU. If these three parties unite they can easily control both the Legislature and the Executive.

If, on the other hand, Kalonzo Musyoka joins hands with William Ruto to revive the almost dead KKK with the hope that Uhuru Kenyatta will join them later, then Raila Odinga will face a formidable opposition in the 2012 Presidential elections. That scenario is unlikely to take place because between them, William Ruto, Uhuru Kenyatta and Kalonzo Musyoka will never agree on who to elevate to be the Presidential candidate and who would be the running mate. May be the most difficult agreement between the three to reach is who will be willing to step down as the third person who will neither be the next President nor the next Deputy President. None of the three is that magnanimous.

If the ODM, PNU and ODM-K unity Raila Odinga and Mwai Kibaki are trying to establish succeeds, then the implementation of the new Constitution will take place quite smoothly with or without the support of William Ruto, who is already in trouble with the ODM leadership, which is threatening to discipline him for opposing the Proposed Constitution against the wishes of the party. As the politicians scheme to get jobs in the new political setup in Kenya, the noises made by church leaders backed by the retired President Daniel arap Moi, calling for the amendment of the new Constitution before its implementation, will simply not be taken seriously by anyone.

After all the procedure to amend the new Constitution is quite cumbersome and as Nzamba Kitonga, the outgoing chairman of the CoE says, it may take ten years before the move to amend the new Constitution succeeds. At that time Kenyans will be so used to their new Constitution that they will probably see no need to amend it at all.

Constitution: No room for dialogue

The ratification of the Proposed Constitution by the more than six million Kenyans makes it the property of the people. It cannot be changed through any dialogue by a group of clergymen and politicians. The noise being made by Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka and William Ruto backed by a group of church leaders headed by Cardinal John Njue of the Catholic Church is, therefore, just that: Noise!

But that noise can change into very serious threat to the unity of this country if it is sustained between now and the date of promulgation of the new Constitution which should be known as the Constitution Day and probably be a public holiday from now on in the place of Kenyatta Day, which should be named the Mashunjaa Day and be scrapped as a public holiday. Cardinal Njue, William Ruto, Daniel arap Moi and Kalonzo Musyoka know very well that the time to go back to the negotiating table over the content of the ratified Constitution of Kenya, passed on August 4th when the people made a final decision on that matter.That time is gone for good.

Though both Prime Minister Raila Odinga and President Mwai Kibaki now sound very reconciliatory when they talk of the need for peace and unity while the ratified Constitution is being implemented, none has suggested any possibility of reopening negotiations for amendments of any part of the new document. The closest to what is likely to happen was in fact revealed by Mwai Kibaki when he addressed a large crowd outside the Kenyatta International Conference Centre on August 5th when he assured the people he described as “brothers and sisters who voted against the Proposed Constitution” that their voices “have been heard.”

That is a very clever way of putting it. Kibaki was talking of the voices of the opponents of the Proposed Constitution having been heard. He was not talking of the future. He did not say the voices of the opponents of the Proposed Constitution will continue to be heard. As a matter of fact if anyone had any doubt about what Kibaki meant he repeated it in the same written speech when he said: “We shall continue with dialogue as we implement the new constitution. Those who have expressed different views about some of the issues in the new Constitution will continue to be listened to within the vibrant democratic institutions established under the new Constitution.”

To Mwai Kibaki “dialogue” means following the provision of the ratified Constitution to the letter because , as he said in the same speech :“ After all, democracy is about accepting the verdict of the majority while at the same time giving room for accommodation of the minority.” The President did not need to elaborate that the only way to accommodate the Rutos, Njues, Kalonzos and Mois was going to follow the provisions of the ratified Constitution.

As the President and the Prime Minister were celebrating the “YES” victory in Nairobi, the Minister for Tourism, Najib Balala, was doing the same in Mombasa where he also addressed a large crowd of jubilant Kenyans. The Minister’s words were more blunt and forthright – there was going to be no more negotiations on constitutional matters. The only concern of the Government, said the Minister, would be the implementation of the new Constitution.

The implementation of the new Constitution will, however, not be an easy matter. First there will be the whole issue of appointing two important teams that will play a major role in the implementation process. The first will be the establishment of the Parliamentary Select Committee to be known as the Constitution Implementation Oversight Committee (CIOC); and the second team will be the Commission on the Implementation of the ratified Constitution (CIC).

Both the CIOC and CIC will play very important roles in making sure that the will of the people of Kenya is obeyed and implemented legally without any malice or dirty tricks. It is therefore extremely important that the members of the two teams are people of impeccable uprightness in genuinely seeking reforms in Kenya. The CIOC will be made up of politicians and the CIC will be made up of technocrats of proven ability. While selecting members of the CIOC, MPs must be careful not to choose people who have been working against the new Constitution.

In Parliament there are a number of people who are still very bitter because their plan to wreck the entire process of getting Kenyans a new Constitution has been rejected by the wananchi. Their only hope is now to infiltrate the CIOC with a view of slowing down its deliberations, which will include overseeing the implementation of the ratified Constitution including receiving regular reports from CIC concerning preparation of legislation required by the ratified Constitution and any challenges in that regard.

Parliament is full of competent members who championed the reforms course while they were campaigning for the new Constitution. People like Martha Karua and Gitobu Imanyara are two of a handful of lawyers in the Legislature whose services in CIOC could be of great importance to the country.

Other important duties of the CIOC will be coordinating with the Attorney-General, the CIC and relevant parliamentary committees to ensure the timely introduction and passage of the legislation required by the ratified Constitution; and to take appropriate action on the reports including addressing any problems in the implementation of the ratified Constitution. This is not the kind of job that should be left in the hands of people who opposed the Proposed Constitution no matter how qualified they may be.

Parliament will have yet another important duty of approving the appointment by the President of members of the Commission on the Implementation of the ratified Constitution (CIC). The law prohibits Nzamba Kitonga and his team from being considered in this new lot otherwise he would have been the ideal person to serve in this very important commission whose duties include monitoring, facilitating and overseeing the development of legislation and administrative procedures required to implement the ratified Constitution.

The Commission will also be required to coordinate with the AG and the Kenya Law Reform Commission in preparing, for tabling in Parliament, the legislation required to implement the ratified Constitution. CIC will report regularly to the CIOC on progress in the implementation of the ratified Constitution; and any impediments to its implementation; and work with each constitutional commission to ensure that the letter and spirit of the ratified Constitution is respected.

There is very little doubt that the President, working with the Prime Minister, will appoint men and women of impeccable record as far as championing the course for the Proposed Constitution is concerned. Lawyers who did everything to frustrate the people’s efforts to get a new Constitution should be avoided by the President and the Prime Minister who should not touch them with barge pole.

Lawyers who backed the Proposed Constitution and worked hard to get it ratified by the people should be considered to become members of this important Commission. If the President and the Prime Minister make a mistake of appoint people who will work against the desires of the wananchi’s determination to get the ratified Constitution promulgated without any changes, then Parliament should correct such a mistake and reject the names of suspected people who would cause impediments to the burning desire of the people to constitutionally correct the injustices done to them.

All these are important legal steps that must be taken to makes sure the new Constitution is truly implemented in Kenya as soon as possible. It will be impossible to concentrate on this vital task if the country now starts talking about new dialogue. This therefore is not the time for dialogue. It is the time to fulfill the wishes of more than six million people who, as the majority, must have their way. When Kenya has a new Constitution, the minority, will continue to have their say about what needs to be amended.

New Constitution: The task ahead

Kenyans have a brand new Constitution now. But that means more work and less talk. The time for bickering should end today as true leaders of Kenya mobilize the people to forge a new unity and a meaningful reconciliation. Among the most important jobs to be done to make sure the new Constitution bears fruitful results will be the passing of a number of legislations promised by the Proposed Constitution.

All of a sudden Kenyans will now be looking at their MPs more closely to see who is and who is not working for the Constitution they have endorsed. If there will be a list of MPs who will be shown the door in the forthcoming elections of 2012, then those who opposed the Proposed Constitution in areas where the people endorsed it will top that list. These include people like Chris Okemo and Margaret Wambui. The stand they took to reject the Proposed Constitution will be used against them in 2012. A lot of them will try to become either Senators of Governors of their counties; but the record they have left behind during the just ended campaigns for and against the Constitution will simply work against them.

Just as I predicted long ago the new Constitution will strengthen the political status of Prime Minister Raila Odinga who is likely to be even more popular throughout the country before the 2012 elections. This is likely to make ODM the most powerful political organization in the entire country. It will not be surprising at all if more political giants join the ODM with the hope of becoming Raila’s running mate in the next general election.

Musalia Mudavadi is therefore likely to get new political enemies who will challenge his number two position to and as an automatic running mate of Raila Odinga. The role played by President Mwai Kibaki in preparing the ground for his departure will also be most interesting as he may surprise people by backing a Raila – Uhuru team. Right now it may not be surprising if Raila is officially appointed the Leader of Government Business in the Legislature where a lot of work will have to be done to operationalise the new Constitution.

According to Kibaki that position belongs to the Vice President; but Kalonzo Musyoka has badly let down the President by being a “watermelon” during the campaign for the Proposed Constitution. Kibaki may not trust Kalonzo Musyoka to lead Government business in Parliament which has a lot of work now that the new Constitution has been endorsed by the people on Kenya.


Even with the new Constitution accepted by the majority of the people in Kenya there is still a lot of work to be done. A number of laws must be passed to operationalise various recommendations made by the new supreme law. These include legislation in respect of culture which is found in Article 11(3) which says that Parliament shall pass legislation to ensure that communities receive compensation or royalties for the use of their culture and cultural heritage; Parliament shall also enact legislation to recognize and protect the ownership of indigenous seeds and plant varieties, their genetic and diverse characteristics and their use by communities in Kenya.

Though the time frame for the passage of these legislations is five years, their advantages are so important to the people of Kenya whose culture has been exploited by foreigners for a very long time. The best examples of these are kangas , kikoys and kiondos which are indigenously Kenyan items which are now sold all over the world with little benefit to the people of Kenya . The second part of the legislation will protect plants such as miraa which are to be found in Meru but are sold in various parts of the world by people other than Merus. Paradoxically among the people who spoke most loudly against the Proposed Constitution are people who told the Merus that if they passed the Proposed Constitution they would lose all their miraa to the Somali people. The people of Igembe , therefore , rejected the Proposed Constitution when the rest of Gema communities overwhelmingly accepted it.

Another important law that must be passed to back the new Constitution concerns Article 18 on citizenship which says Parliament shall enact legislation—(a) prescribing procedures by which a person may become a citizen;(b) governing entry into and residence in Kenya; (c) providing for the status of permanent residents;(d) providing for voluntary renunciation of citizenship; (e) prescribing procedures for revocation of citizenship; (f) prescribing the duties and rights of citizens; and(g) generally giving effect to the provisions of the Chapter on citizenship. Though the time frame for this legislation is one year its importance is very clear. The uncontrolled manner in which foreigners obtained citizenship in Kenya was open to a lot of abuse and corruption which now must now be put to an end.

Other important legislations on the pipeline concern many suggestions made in the Bill of Rights beginning with Article 34 on freedom of the media which says freedom and independence of electronic, print and all other types of media is guaranteed, but does not extend to any expression specified in Article 33 (2) which says the right to freedom of expression does not extend to—(a) propaganda for war;(b) incitement to violence;(c) hate speech; or (d) advocacy of hatred that—(i) constitutes ethnic incitement, vilification of
others or incitement to cause harm; or(ii) is based on any ground of discrimination
specified or contemplated in Article 27 (4) which says the State shall not discriminate directly or indirectly against any person on any ground, including race, sex, pregnancy,
marital status, health status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, dress, language or birth. The time frame for the implementation of this part of the Constitution is three years but there is no reason for media houses not operationalising it right now.

Section 34 (2) of the Constitution says the State shall not—(a) exercise control over or interfere with any person engaged in broadcasting, the production or circulation
of any publication or the dissemination of information by any medium; or (b) penalize any person for any opinion or view or the content of any broadcast, publication or dissemination. Obviously this part does not need to wait for three years to be implemented.

Article 34 (3) of the Constitution says broadcasting and other electronic media have freedom of establishment, subject only to licensing procedures that— (a) are necessary to regulate the airwaves and other forms of signal distribution; and (b) are independent of control by government, political interests or commercial interests. Article 34 (4) says all State-owned media shall—(a) be free to determine independently the editorial content
of their broadcasts or other communications;(b) be impartial; and(c) afford fair opportunity for the presentation of divergent views and dissenting opinions.

Kenyans will remember how the national radio and television stations were used by Kenyatta and Moi as instruments of suppression which totally denied the people the right to air their views freely. According Article 34 (5) Parliament shall within a period of three years enact legislation that provides for the establishment of a body, which shall—(a) be independent of control by government, political interests or commercial interests;(b) reflect the interests of all sections of the society; and (c) set media standards and regulate and monitor compliance with those standards.

Despite the negative aspect of the opponents of the Proposed Constitution during the emotional campaign period family life of Kenyans will considerably be improved within five years when Parliament enacts legislation that recognizes—(a) marriages concluded under any tradition, or system of religious, personal or family law; and (b) any system of personal and family law under any tradition, or adhered to by persons professing a particular religion, to the extent that any such marriages or systems of law are consistent with this Constitution. That means family injustices that have been taking place in the previous constitution will now be a thing of the past.

These are jut a few examples of legislations which need to be passed by Parliament to make sure the new Constitution takes roots in the country. The best place to campaign for the next election will be in Parliament. Those who will continue to oppose the new Constitution will only blame themselves when they are rejected by the progressive wananchi of Kenya in 2012.

Referendum Results: It’s a revolution!

Kenyans have staged a bloodless coup and toppled despotism. By overwhelmingly supporting the Proposed Constitution with almost 70% approval vote they have forever silenced the voice of oppression that has for decades subjugated them both politically and economically. From today Kenyans can walk tall in any part of the world and pride themselves as a people with one of the world's best Bill of Rights in their constitution.

The rigorous campaign for the rejection of the Proposed Constitution by the retired President Daniel arap Moi did more damage than good to his camp. It simply reminded the people of Kenya how Moi totally silenced the voice of reason when he ruled Kenya with an iron fist for 24 years. Every time he opened his mouth outside the Kalenjin territory during the campaign he brought back memories of when he filled his Government with people from his own ethnic group regardless of their qualification.

The way he tried, but miserably failed, to ridicule President Kibaki’s record as a reformer made people remember how he changed the legislature in Kenya into a rubberstamp parliament whose duty was to endorse his will. The very presence of Moi in the campaign trail reminded the people how he used to promote and demote top civil servants and politicians when he was addressing roadside meetings as the President of Kenya.

His attack on the content of the Proposed Constitution took people back to the time when he simply threw whoever opposed him into jail without trial. Looking at Moi losing his temper while asking the people to reject the Proposed Constitution reminded people how little respect he had for justice when he was the country’s overall boss. Those who had been unfairly jailed by Moi could remember how he changed the judicial system in Kenya to suit his own political convenience by reducing judges and magistrates as administrators of Kangaroo courts where justice was hardly seen to be done if the accused person had Moi’s Government as his or her opponent.

The manner in which Daniel Toroitich arap Moi misruled Kenya by creating a class of extremely rich people who cared little about the downtrodden have-nots made many Kenyans see the importance of the Bill of Rights in the Proposed Constitution. Now they have a constitution which takes very serious steps to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor.

As Article 19(1), for example, says Bill of Rights is the integral part of Kenya’s democratic state and is the framework for social, economic and cultural policies. When campaigning against the Proposed Constitution , former President Daniel arap Moi , backed by his most loyal disciples, William Ruto and Cyrus Jirongo who were joined by Samuel Poghisio , Chris Okemo and Margaret Wanjiru, knew they were fighting a losing battle. Working against them was the fact that very many Kenyans are today able to read and write and could easily tell when they were given wrong information about the Proposed Constitution in public meetings.

The deliberate misinformation by the politicians who opposed the Proposed Constitution did not even need organized rebuttal campaigns to give the people the correct information. When William Ruto told many crowds he addressed that the Proposed Constitution was against the Christian church as it favoured Islam no one needed to correct that information to the people who knew very well that the subordinate Kadhi courts could not in any way, shape or form make Islam the favoured religion in Kenya. Ruto’s misguided views were further exposed when he went to the North Eastern Province and told the majority Muslim voters to reject the Proposed Constitution as it favoured American anti-terrorism laws which discriminated against Muslims. The double faced Ruto made it extremely easy for the “YES” camp to win votes among the Muslim Somalis.

It so happens that throughout the 24 years he was in power, retired President Daniel arap Moi had very little respect for the dignity of individual Kenyans. Political jails were full of innocent Kenyans; journalists were scared stiff to call a spade a spade and many of them were used as propaganda tools. From now on children in Kenya will be taught about the importance of human dignity as it is found in Article 19(2) of their constitution which says the purpose of recognizing and protecting human rights and fundamental freedoms is to preserve the dignity of individuals and communities and to promote social justice and the realization of potential of all human beings.

Any newcomer to this country is hit hard by the shocking disparity between the rich and the poor. The country has more four wheel expensive cars on its roads than many developed nations. Yet anyone driving along the bad roads in the capital city cannot help seeing expansive slums scattered in many parts of the so-called city in the sun. The misrule of Kenya by the privileged class has helped the creation and growth of the largest slums in the entire continent where people live in the most poverty stricken lifestyle imaginable. These are the people who get the maximum benefit from the new Bill of Rights that is not only concerned with the first generation human rights; but, even more important for them, the second generation human rights.

The passage of the Proposed Constitution means very bad news to few Kenyans especially those in the Kalenjin community in the Rift Valley. The good news is the fact that it will take a very short time for them to realize that their leaders, headed by William Ruto were in fact telling them no more and no less than a cock and bull story about the Proposed Constitution. Now is the time to mobilize all the Government resources to persuade the Kalenjin to know the truth about their Constitution. No effort must be spared to make them realize that they are as good Kenyans as any other as far the new supreme law of the land is concerned.

The other group that is bound to feel dejected by the new Constitution is the Clergy that allowed itself to be emotionally moved by a stand they knew was going to lose. A number of them saw the light before it was too late and jumped ship to join the winning side. The rest have now lost face before their various congregations, which they will now have to persuade to accept the new Constitution which many will have no option but to pray for. All the lies they told about the Proposed Constitution will have to be corrected by the same people who have voices on pulpits. The sad truth is that a lot of them are bound to lose respect from their own flock.

Another group of Kenyans that is likely to be unhappy with the new Constitution include people who expected to have their own counties but at the moment feel they have been swallowed up by larger ethnic group with which hey have been dumped together. A lot of politicians who have been behaving like kings and queens in their own little tribes will neither be able to be governors of the counties they belong to nor represent their people in the Senate. In this group are people like Naomi Shaban who is the undisputed leader of the Taveta people.

But now she belongs to Taita-Taveta County which will obviously elect a Taita to the Senate and have another Taita as the new governor.Unfortunately for Shaban, her own people of Taveta overwhelmingly voted "YES" for the Proposed Constitution sending her a clear message that in 2012 she may may find it difficult to go back to Parliament as they may chose someone who will cooperate with the Government in implementing the new Constitution. If ever there will be a Cabinet reshuffle after the referendum, Naomi Shaban seems to be the most threatened Minister.

Among the misguided people of Kenya are the Kambas who have, for all practical purposes , rejected the Proposed Constitution. This is likely to embarrass the Vice President and a number of top civil servants from the community who will now have an uphill task to convince their colleagues in the Government that they mean business in implementing the demands of the new Constitution in general and Agenda Four of the national accord in particular . The error of judgement was made by Kalonzo Musyoka who wanted to save the KKK unity that would have sponsored him as the 2015 presidential candidate.

Unfortunately that plan has boomeranged badly on Kalonzo Musyoka,who was booed by a large crowd that turned up at the Kenyatta International Conference Centre to celebrate the "YES" victory. Obviously the people see Kalonzo as an insincere partner in the Raila-Kibaki coalition Government. Besides that the people’s endorsement of the Proposed Constitution means the death of KKK. Uhuru Kenyatta now belongs to a winning political camp and nothing will convince him to go back to the rejected camp as the Kalonzo-Ruto political group can hardly get more than 30% support of the people of Kenya .