The approval by Parliament of the list of members of the new Interim Independent Electoral Commission of Kenya marks the beginning of the end of despotism in Kenya. President Mwai Kibaki has little choice but approve the list which is composed of people of proven honesty and integrity who will, hopefully, make sure that future elections and referenda will be conducted in a free and fair manner. The approval of the list also marks the beginning of a long road towards the reforms stipulated in Agenda Four and both the Waki and Kriegler reports.
All the despots who have misruled Kenya for so long have been put in power by sham elections which were rigged through gerrymandering and deliberate mismanagement of the electoral process. Jomo Kenyatta, for example, never tolerated anyone to oppose him in a free and fair election. Strictly speaking the only elections he truly won were the last ones to be organized by the colonialists in 1963. He won as a Kanu candidate against Kadu which was the only other mass political party in the country.
The real first Presidential elections in Kenya took place in 1969 when Jomo Kenyatta was already a despot after making several constitutional changes to make it absolutely impossible for any opposition against him to be tolerated. Among these amendments was the Preservation of Public Security Act of 1966, which provided for the declaration of a state of emergency and for detention without trial.
This law made people to be extremely scared of the Government in general and the President in particular. No one dared to even dream of opposing the good old Jomo in any election be they party, parliamentary or presidential. The behaviour of people like John Michuki when he ordered the invasion of The Standard newspapers clearly proves that there are people in Kibaki’s Government who wish such obnoxious laws still existed in the country. Such people obviously will spend sleepless nights knowing Kenya now is about to have truly free and fair elections organized by the new IIEC. Because Kenyatta had already been declared a life president of Kanu which was the only De Facto political party in Kenya there was also no one to oppose him in the 1974 general elections.
If Kenyatta introduced dictatorial policies that made free and fair election almost impossible under his rule, President Daniel arap Moi, who succeed him, perfected those policies. In 1983 the country saw the first general elections conducted in a De Jure one party atmosphere. This was to be followed by the most notorious Mlolongo elections of 1988. These are all reasons why Kenyans should wholeheartedly welcome the new list of members of the IIEC. This is particularly so because both the disciples of Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi still hold very powerful positions in the current Government and sometimes they show clear indications that they are unable to resist the temptation to emulate the first and second presidents of Kenya.
The challenges facing the new IIEC are many but among the most important concerns the updating the voter register. This, together with gerrymandering, has always been used by the despots of Kenya to make sure they were returned to the seat of power, election after election. Millions of Kenyans were disenfranchised as ethnic nationalism was encouraged through the registration of voters. In the last elections no less than a million dead people were supposed to have voted while millions of living ones were denied their constitutional right to elect their representatives in the Legislature. The new team must come up with a genuine voter register that will go a long way to legitimize elections in this country.
One of the biggest challenges facing the new IIEC will be how the new team will get involved in organizing and supervising the primary elections in this country. Without free and fair elections in political parties in Kenya we can never hope to have true democracy that will establish “a government of the people by the people and for the people”. The country desperately needs to have proper democracy in political parties that will ensure free and fair nomination process. Today all political parties are properties of powerful leaders in the country.
PNU belongs to Mwai Kibaki, ODM-K is the property of Kalonzo Musyoka and ODM is in the pocket of Raila Odinga. No one can hope to be nominated in anyone of these major parties without the approval of the political giants named above. Some legal steps may need to be taken to give the new IIEC enough powers to organize party elections including nominations for general elections. No efforts should be spared to take those measures. After all we are now being guided by principles of honesty and transparency. Party elections must also be transparent.
If political leaders in Kenya claim to be heading popular political parties then they must allow the people to participate in the organization and internal elections of those political parties. Unless the people participate in these vital electoral processes we cannot claim to have free and fair elections. The Kriegler report says an examination of political parties in Kenya (as at 30 June 2008) revealed that they were, as currently constituted, incapable of providing democratic space to their membership.
By and large, the report says, they are characterized by lack of transparency in choosing leaders. Elections for office- bearers are rarely held or when held are cosmetic and therefore undemocratic. As a result, leadership is often arbitrary, autocratic and unaccountable. According to the report, parties are also dogged by flawed and poor party nomination rules and processes. The leadership interferes with party electoral processes, especially in nominating candidates for elective positions.
This will probably be the most difficult challenge to face the IIEC because the culprits are the same powerful people in our country pretending to aspire for reforms. I am deliberately using the word “pretending” because none of our political leaders today is prepared to introduce democracy in the political party they own. Yet without internal democracy in political parties we might as well forget ever having free and fair elections in Kenya.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Marende's Ruling is a Victory for Raila
The ruling by the National Assembly Speaker Kenneth Marende boosted Raila Odinga’s powers to challenge any decision by Mwai Kibaki. It succeeded in stopping the habit of obeying the President blindly. Kibaki’s nomination of Kalonzo Musyoka as the Leader of Government Business in the National Assembly has been shelved because it was challenged by the Prime Minister. Never before, in the history of independent Kenya, has anyone challenged any Executive Order by a sitting President and lived to talk of his success.
Those who did so in the past, including Raila’s own father, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, ended up in jail without any trial. Raila himself has suffered the same fate as his father for challenging the powers of a sitting President. Others who challenged Presidential powers simply disappeared or died in very mysterious circumstances.
Marende’s ruling also saved the country for, without it, Parliament was being threatened by its total inability to perform its duty without a House Business Committee. Now the Legislature has a HBC but without its chair – a position which will temporarily be occupied by Marende himself. But Marende is, for all practical purposes, a product of ODM and for that reason even when he serves as the chairman of the HBC it is indeed another victory for Raila.
Before Marende made his historic ruling, PNU members were arguing that no one could challenge the appointment by the President as the Constitution gave him powers to do so. ODM maintained that National Accord and Reconciliation Act demanded that ODM be involved in the process. Raila’s proposal of his own name to be the Leader of Government Business was only meant to show that Kibaki could not make such an important appointment single handedly. Looked at more intently, Marende’s ruling makes Raila’s goal succeed. For Marende says the Accord and the Constitution must be looked at jointly while determining who is right between Raila and Kibaki.
Marende’s ruling has temporarily ended the dangerous confrontation between the two parties forming the coalition Government; but only the very naïve will think it has finished the feud over the leader of Government business in a permanent manner. The House may very well function for a long time without the Leader of Government Business with each Minister speaking for his or her own Ministry. That also means the Speaker is likely to be the chairman of the HBC for a very long time.
In a speech during the State Opening of the Third Session of the Tenth Parliament on April 21st Marende talked of unhealthy intrigue that sometimes threatens to overshadow the tenets of governance in Kenya. He urged MPs to move away from side shows, small talk and stop hitting below the belt to gain unfair advantage or start fresh battles. Did those prophetic words come out of the Speaker spontaneously or did he know something Kibaki didn’t? Did he , as an ODM insider, know that Raila was planning for a major battle for power both in and outside Parliament? Only Marende can give us the answer to that pertinent question. In a way his ruling did so in the most revealing manner.
In his ruling he tried to define the current Government of Kenya as the unity between Raila and Kibaki – a coalition Government as defined by the Accord. But that is not the way Marende thought on April 21st . At that time he told Kibaki this: “Your Excellency, may I conclude my brief remarks by thanking your Government for being mindful about assisting the National Assembly to access enough resources to carry out effective oversight of the Executive, particularly through the Committee system and implementation of other capital projects.” When Raila claimed the leadership of the Legislature on behalf of the coalition Government, Marende changed his mind and his definition of Government somehow is exactly the same as that of the ODM leader’s. What a coincident?
Marende’s ruling is a big loss for the PNU. In Kalonzo Musyoka they had the leadership of Government business in the Legislature. Under Marende they have lost that leadership to the ODM. Given the fact that Marende does only what Raila likes, it is obvious that the real leader of Government Business is, at the moment, the chairman of the HBC who is Marende the ODM loyalist. Under Marende the HBC will follow the ODM agenda and institute reforms that are favourable to the ODM.
The experience that Kenyans have gained out of the bitter rivalry for the control of the Legislature is that the most powerful person in Parliament at the moment is the Prime Minister. When the house begins to discuss serious business concerning urgent constitutional changes it is obvious that very major steps will be taken to change the country into a proper parliamentary democracy like Britain and India. Kibaki will soon be reduced into a figurehead President to perform various national ceremonies and live comfortably at State House as the Head of State.
The manner in which Raila has manipulated Parliament to deny both Mwai Kibaki and Kalonzo Musyoka the leadership of Government business at the Legislature is the same way he will get a list favourable to him to serve in the Interim Independent Electoral Commission. As a matter of fact that list already exists and it will never pass through Parliament if Raila does not think it is composed of pro ODM personalities.
The only headache that Raila has in the current Legislature is the threat by a number of ODM MPs to form a Grand Opposition. It will be difficult for him to allow any ODM MPs to form an Opposition in Parliament as doing so is likely to weaken his grip on the entire Legislature which he has now shown the whole country to have.
The fight for the leadership of Government business in the Legislature and the control of HBC has taught the country an important lesson – that consultations as stipulated in the Accord are extremely important otherwise neither Raila nor Kibaki can rule the country without the other. The other important lesson learnt from the ODM-PNU fights is the fact that of the two, ODM is a lot stronger in Parliament and if PNU does not watch out a vote of no confidence in President Kibaki can be passed at any time when Raila feels it is opportune.
Those who did so in the past, including Raila’s own father, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, ended up in jail without any trial. Raila himself has suffered the same fate as his father for challenging the powers of a sitting President. Others who challenged Presidential powers simply disappeared or died in very mysterious circumstances.
Marende’s ruling also saved the country for, without it, Parliament was being threatened by its total inability to perform its duty without a House Business Committee. Now the Legislature has a HBC but without its chair – a position which will temporarily be occupied by Marende himself. But Marende is, for all practical purposes, a product of ODM and for that reason even when he serves as the chairman of the HBC it is indeed another victory for Raila.
Before Marende made his historic ruling, PNU members were arguing that no one could challenge the appointment by the President as the Constitution gave him powers to do so. ODM maintained that National Accord and Reconciliation Act demanded that ODM be involved in the process. Raila’s proposal of his own name to be the Leader of Government Business was only meant to show that Kibaki could not make such an important appointment single handedly. Looked at more intently, Marende’s ruling makes Raila’s goal succeed. For Marende says the Accord and the Constitution must be looked at jointly while determining who is right between Raila and Kibaki.
Marende’s ruling has temporarily ended the dangerous confrontation between the two parties forming the coalition Government; but only the very naïve will think it has finished the feud over the leader of Government business in a permanent manner. The House may very well function for a long time without the Leader of Government Business with each Minister speaking for his or her own Ministry. That also means the Speaker is likely to be the chairman of the HBC for a very long time.
In a speech during the State Opening of the Third Session of the Tenth Parliament on April 21st Marende talked of unhealthy intrigue that sometimes threatens to overshadow the tenets of governance in Kenya. He urged MPs to move away from side shows, small talk and stop hitting below the belt to gain unfair advantage or start fresh battles. Did those prophetic words come out of the Speaker spontaneously or did he know something Kibaki didn’t? Did he , as an ODM insider, know that Raila was planning for a major battle for power both in and outside Parliament? Only Marende can give us the answer to that pertinent question. In a way his ruling did so in the most revealing manner.
In his ruling he tried to define the current Government of Kenya as the unity between Raila and Kibaki – a coalition Government as defined by the Accord. But that is not the way Marende thought on April 21st . At that time he told Kibaki this: “Your Excellency, may I conclude my brief remarks by thanking your Government for being mindful about assisting the National Assembly to access enough resources to carry out effective oversight of the Executive, particularly through the Committee system and implementation of other capital projects.” When Raila claimed the leadership of the Legislature on behalf of the coalition Government, Marende changed his mind and his definition of Government somehow is exactly the same as that of the ODM leader’s. What a coincident?
Marende’s ruling is a big loss for the PNU. In Kalonzo Musyoka they had the leadership of Government business in the Legislature. Under Marende they have lost that leadership to the ODM. Given the fact that Marende does only what Raila likes, it is obvious that the real leader of Government Business is, at the moment, the chairman of the HBC who is Marende the ODM loyalist. Under Marende the HBC will follow the ODM agenda and institute reforms that are favourable to the ODM.
The experience that Kenyans have gained out of the bitter rivalry for the control of the Legislature is that the most powerful person in Parliament at the moment is the Prime Minister. When the house begins to discuss serious business concerning urgent constitutional changes it is obvious that very major steps will be taken to change the country into a proper parliamentary democracy like Britain and India. Kibaki will soon be reduced into a figurehead President to perform various national ceremonies and live comfortably at State House as the Head of State.
The manner in which Raila has manipulated Parliament to deny both Mwai Kibaki and Kalonzo Musyoka the leadership of Government business at the Legislature is the same way he will get a list favourable to him to serve in the Interim Independent Electoral Commission. As a matter of fact that list already exists and it will never pass through Parliament if Raila does not think it is composed of pro ODM personalities.
The only headache that Raila has in the current Legislature is the threat by a number of ODM MPs to form a Grand Opposition. It will be difficult for him to allow any ODM MPs to form an Opposition in Parliament as doing so is likely to weaken his grip on the entire Legislature which he has now shown the whole country to have.
The fight for the leadership of Government business in the Legislature and the control of HBC has taught the country an important lesson – that consultations as stipulated in the Accord are extremely important otherwise neither Raila nor Kibaki can rule the country without the other. The other important lesson learnt from the ODM-PNU fights is the fact that of the two, ODM is a lot stronger in Parliament and if PNU does not watch out a vote of no confidence in President Kibaki can be passed at any time when Raila feels it is opportune.
Friday, April 24, 2009
HBC Row : Raila Flexes his Muscles
Raila Odinga is literally flexing his muscles in Parliament and scaring the whole nation. His efforts to snatch more executive powers from President Kibaki have now spread from Kilaguni to Parliament. The Prime Minister is officially challenging Kibaki’s orders to nominate Kalonzo Musyoka as the Leader of Government Business and Chairman of the House Business Committee (HBC) and instead he has nominated himself to occupy the two powerful positions in the Legislature. As the political quarrels between the two giants continue, the country is facing a political crisis when Parliament cannot function and yet no fresh elections can be held without an electoral commission.
Though Raila has not categorically said so openly, it is now clear that his main goal is to become a real executive Prime Minister while reducing the President to a mere figurehead for ceremonial purposes. If this is the case then the country is headed for a major constitutional crisis because Section 23 of the Constitution clearly says the executive authority of the Government of Kenya shall vest in the President and, subject to this Constitution, may be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinates to him.
That notwithstanding, Raila is obviously aware of Subsection two of the same part of the Constitution which also categorically says nothing in this section shall prevent Parliament from conferring functions on persons or authorities other than the President. Kibaki may have constitutional powers to appoint the Leader of Government business, but Raila can usurp those powers by using the Legislature to appoint himself the Leader of Government Business as well as the chairman of HBC.
In other words the Parliament in Kenya can be manipulated by Raila to fulfill all his political ambitions regardless of what Kibaki wants. After all, Raila controls the majority in Parliament. So if there is supremacy of the Legislature in Kenya that supremacy is vested in the office of the Prime Minister who controls the Parliament. From now on the country will see Raila making full use of Parliament to exercise his powers to the total amazement and disgust of Kibaki and his Mount Kenya Mafia.
The fact that the Prime Minister can hold the entire Legislature to ransom can easily be proved by the manner in which Parliament has been totally incapable of selecting a leader of Government Business and Chairman of HBC – all because Raila has not approved the appointment by Kibaki. This crisis could easily have been avoided if Kibaki consulted Raila before appointing Kalonzo to the high office in the legislature. After all the agreement on the principles of partnership of the coalition government clearly indicated that neither side can realistically govern the country without the other. It suggests that there must be real power-sharing to move the country forward and begin the healing and reconciliation process.
When the country was ungovernable following what amounted to a civil war after the sham election of 2007, the two leaders agreed to overcome the crisis and set the country on a new path. As partners in a coalition Government, they committed themselves to work together in good faith as true partners, through constant consultation and willingness to compromise. In this regard, Kibaki has not been consulting Raila as much as the agreement demands and on the other hand, Raila does not appear to be any more willing to compromise as the agreement says. Both sides seem to be influenced by well known hardliners who benefit from the political tug-of-war between the two leaders.
Unfortunately this time the rope used in that tug-of-war is about to snap, threatening to through the country in a deep quagmire of political misunderstanding that may yet again see bloodbath and tribal animosity, which the country can do without. The agreement the two leaders signed on February 28th 2008 and witnessed by President Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania and Mr. Kofi Annan was designed to create an environment conducive to a partnership that would build mutual trust and confidence. It clearly says that its purpose was not about creating positions that would reward individuals.
The manner in which Raila is fighting to gain more powers and prestige both in and out of Parliament could therefore be said to go against the spirit of the agreement because what he is demanding is the creation of positions that would reward him individually. With him officially in charge of all the activities of the Legislature he will have gained a major step towards becoming a real Executive Prime Minister of the Republic of Kenya. Incidentally, that is the title ODM refers him to instead of the Prime Minister of the Government of Kenya as the both the agreement and the law calls him.
If Prime Minister Raila Odinga can be accused of creating positions for himself in a manner that was discouraged by the agreement of February 28, then Kibaki can equally be accused of frustrating the Prime Minister and not allowing him to perform his duties according to the that same agreement which says the Prime Minister shall have the authority to co-ordinate and supervise the execution of the functions and affairs of the Government including those of the Ministries. Of late Raila has complained that Kibaki does a lot behind his back including the appointment of Kalonzo Musyoka as the leader of Government Business in Parliament.
According to the preamble of the February 28th agreement the crisis triggered by 2007 disputed presidential elections brought to the surface deep-seated longstanding divisions within the Kenyan society. If left unaddressed, these divisions threatened the very existence of Kenya as a unified country. These are the words that Kenyans want Raila and Kibaki to remember this weekend before Parliament reconvenes next Tuesday. They must put the country before their personal goals and as the preamble of the February 28th said: “The Kenyan people are now looking to their leaders to ensure that their country will not be lost”.
Next week the Speaker of the National Assembly, Kenneth Marinade, will chose between Raila Odinga and Kalonzo Musyoka to lead the House. If he picks Kalonzo ODM MPs are likely to make his work extremely difficult with a Parliament becoming dysfunctional. On the other hand if he picks Raila, Parliament will become the Prime Minster’s political instrument to gain more powers. Either way the spirit of the February 28th agreement seems to have disappeared in thin air. That is bad news for Kenya.
Though Raila has not categorically said so openly, it is now clear that his main goal is to become a real executive Prime Minister while reducing the President to a mere figurehead for ceremonial purposes. If this is the case then the country is headed for a major constitutional crisis because Section 23 of the Constitution clearly says the executive authority of the Government of Kenya shall vest in the President and, subject to this Constitution, may be exercised by him either directly or through officers subordinates to him.
That notwithstanding, Raila is obviously aware of Subsection two of the same part of the Constitution which also categorically says nothing in this section shall prevent Parliament from conferring functions on persons or authorities other than the President. Kibaki may have constitutional powers to appoint the Leader of Government business, but Raila can usurp those powers by using the Legislature to appoint himself the Leader of Government Business as well as the chairman of HBC.
In other words the Parliament in Kenya can be manipulated by Raila to fulfill all his political ambitions regardless of what Kibaki wants. After all, Raila controls the majority in Parliament. So if there is supremacy of the Legislature in Kenya that supremacy is vested in the office of the Prime Minister who controls the Parliament. From now on the country will see Raila making full use of Parliament to exercise his powers to the total amazement and disgust of Kibaki and his Mount Kenya Mafia.
The fact that the Prime Minister can hold the entire Legislature to ransom can easily be proved by the manner in which Parliament has been totally incapable of selecting a leader of Government Business and Chairman of HBC – all because Raila has not approved the appointment by Kibaki. This crisis could easily have been avoided if Kibaki consulted Raila before appointing Kalonzo to the high office in the legislature. After all the agreement on the principles of partnership of the coalition government clearly indicated that neither side can realistically govern the country without the other. It suggests that there must be real power-sharing to move the country forward and begin the healing and reconciliation process.
When the country was ungovernable following what amounted to a civil war after the sham election of 2007, the two leaders agreed to overcome the crisis and set the country on a new path. As partners in a coalition Government, they committed themselves to work together in good faith as true partners, through constant consultation and willingness to compromise. In this regard, Kibaki has not been consulting Raila as much as the agreement demands and on the other hand, Raila does not appear to be any more willing to compromise as the agreement says. Both sides seem to be influenced by well known hardliners who benefit from the political tug-of-war between the two leaders.
Unfortunately this time the rope used in that tug-of-war is about to snap, threatening to through the country in a deep quagmire of political misunderstanding that may yet again see bloodbath and tribal animosity, which the country can do without. The agreement the two leaders signed on February 28th 2008 and witnessed by President Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania and Mr. Kofi Annan was designed to create an environment conducive to a partnership that would build mutual trust and confidence. It clearly says that its purpose was not about creating positions that would reward individuals.
The manner in which Raila is fighting to gain more powers and prestige both in and out of Parliament could therefore be said to go against the spirit of the agreement because what he is demanding is the creation of positions that would reward him individually. With him officially in charge of all the activities of the Legislature he will have gained a major step towards becoming a real Executive Prime Minister of the Republic of Kenya. Incidentally, that is the title ODM refers him to instead of the Prime Minister of the Government of Kenya as the both the agreement and the law calls him.
If Prime Minister Raila Odinga can be accused of creating positions for himself in a manner that was discouraged by the agreement of February 28, then Kibaki can equally be accused of frustrating the Prime Minister and not allowing him to perform his duties according to the that same agreement which says the Prime Minister shall have the authority to co-ordinate and supervise the execution of the functions and affairs of the Government including those of the Ministries. Of late Raila has complained that Kibaki does a lot behind his back including the appointment of Kalonzo Musyoka as the leader of Government Business in Parliament.
According to the preamble of the February 28th agreement the crisis triggered by 2007 disputed presidential elections brought to the surface deep-seated longstanding divisions within the Kenyan society. If left unaddressed, these divisions threatened the very existence of Kenya as a unified country. These are the words that Kenyans want Raila and Kibaki to remember this weekend before Parliament reconvenes next Tuesday. They must put the country before their personal goals and as the preamble of the February 28th said: “The Kenyan people are now looking to their leaders to ensure that their country will not be lost”.
Next week the Speaker of the National Assembly, Kenneth Marinade, will chose between Raila Odinga and Kalonzo Musyoka to lead the House. If he picks Kalonzo ODM MPs are likely to make his work extremely difficult with a Parliament becoming dysfunctional. On the other hand if he picks Raila, Parliament will become the Prime Minster’s political instrument to gain more powers. Either way the spirit of the February 28th agreement seems to have disappeared in thin air. That is bad news for Kenya.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Raila’s power game wrecked Kilaguni talks
Because he wants more powers, more money and a lot more respect as the Prime Minister, Raila Odinga deliberately wrecked the Kilaguni talks until his demands are met by Mwai Kibaki’s equally greedy team. In a surprise move that shocked the PNU delegates, ODM introduced new items in the agenda with the full knowledge that the items were as controversial as to be totally unacceptable to the coalition partners.
The plan was to raise the country’s sate of hostile political confrontation to such a high level as to threaten peace and stability everywhere. That alone would force Kibaki to a negotiation table to redraft the peace accord. Will Raila’s plan work? Time alone will tell; but whatever the case may be, it is such a dangerous risk that could easily lead the country to yet another tribal bloodbath that brought about the fragile coalition.
One year after signing the peace accord the ODM leader has realized that all he got from the entire exercise was a flag, a big office, a fat salary for himself and his selected friends and very little political power. His job description as the supervisor of government matters is effectively usurped by Francis Muthaura, the head of the Civil Service. He is not even able to speak authoritatively about the Government affairs as that responsibility is also effectively done by Dr. Alfred Mutua, the official Government spokesman.
After a year of frustration the ODM demanded the renegotiation of the pact that would make sure Raila got more powers and more jobs for his supporters. That demand was ridiculed by many including Kofi Annan who masterminded the Grand Coalition Government. Raila was left with no other option but to use other tricks to achieve his goals. Hence the surprise Kilaguni agenda followed by open hostility against Kibaki.
The controversial items in the Raila agenda at the Kilaguni include protocol and pecking order, security, remuneration , diplomatic treatment, decision making and Government communication, office of the Government spokesman, appointment of PSs, ambassadors , high commissioners, senior military officers, Public Service Commission, NSIS and Police.
Examining the issue of protocol may appear to be trivial as the debate about who has more powers between Raila and Kalonzo Musyoka, the Vice President, ended a long time ago. This time Raila wants to be Mwai Kibaki’s equal – same pay, same respect concerning protocol matters and same security arrangements. The fact that Kibaki’s powers are defined in the Constitution complicates matters, hence the demand for renegotiation of the pact.
For a very long time Muthaura and Mutua have bothered the Prime Minister so much because he feels the two are doing his job and making him appear subordinate to the President. He also feels it is about time his supporters were recruited in the army, the police and the NSIS regardless of obvious problems that may be caused by such a move which politicizes the sensitive security institutions. Raila also feels his many disappointed supporters could be comforted by appointments to ambassadorial jobs and positions of PSs. Needless to say, the Kibaki team feels those changes could only be made over their dead bodies. Hence the current political stalemate. If the deadlock is not sorted out soon it may very well see the end of the coalition government which will come with more deadly consequences than what faced the country last year soon after the sham general elections.
Coming at a time when the country is facing serious economic and unemployment problems , the current political squabbles between leaders already in comfortable and extremely lucrative political jobs, shocks the ordinary Kenyans who are struggling to survive. Many of them live from hand to mouth and they are aware of the fact that they are suffering because the leaders want to be more comfortable. The people know that among the leaders are the most corrupt individuals who would not care if the people starved to death as they steal all the food and public funds. Yet they don’t even want to pay taxes!
The international community must also be equally shocked by the greed of Kenyan leaders. Condemnations from international quarters have been made about extrajudicial killings and incompetence in general and corruption in particular. Suggestions were made that both the Attorney General and the Police Commissioner should be retired in public interest. Realizing that his present powerful position is owed to the international intervention in shaping and structuring the coalition government, Raila was quick to echo the current international dissatisfaction with governance of Kenya.
Whereas they helped him join Kibaki in forming the current Government, the international community may not be quick in backing the present Raila scheme which may destabilize the country and the entire region. Besides that, the international community is also aware that among Raila’s team in the Government are also some people who have been accused of corruption and nepotism. In other words in Raila’s side of the Cabinet are just as many skeletons as they are in the Kibaki side.
If ever there will be any international intervention to solve the current political crisis in the country it will not seek for the renegotiation of the accord. The ODM team is aware of that eventuality and that is why their demands have now been camouflaged in the form of the Kilaguni agenda.
The likelihood of ordinary people picking up arms to fight as they did a year ago is extremely remote. The people have learnt a lesson about who suffers and who gains when they are made to shed their blood to protect the very rich whose concern is only to get even richer. This however does not mean that the country cannot see another bloodbath as it witnessed a little bit more than a year ago. The fact is that there are many well organized gangster organizations that are ready to commit murder and other crimes on behalf of the politicians with a lot of stolen money.
One of the topics that was not discussed at the aborted Kilaguni meeting was the adoption of the Waki Report which, among other things , makes recommendations on how to deal with the criminals among our leaders who were instrumental for the death of well over 1,000 people about a year ago. They were also responsible for the desperate fate of well over 300,000 who were made homeless in their own country as a result of the clashes. Some of the suspects whose names are said to be in the Kofi Annan envelop were at the Kilaguni resort when the talks aborted. They must be extremely happy people now that the Waki Report has been forgotten because of disagreement among our leaders. What a terrible shame.
The plan was to raise the country’s sate of hostile political confrontation to such a high level as to threaten peace and stability everywhere. That alone would force Kibaki to a negotiation table to redraft the peace accord. Will Raila’s plan work? Time alone will tell; but whatever the case may be, it is such a dangerous risk that could easily lead the country to yet another tribal bloodbath that brought about the fragile coalition.
One year after signing the peace accord the ODM leader has realized that all he got from the entire exercise was a flag, a big office, a fat salary for himself and his selected friends and very little political power. His job description as the supervisor of government matters is effectively usurped by Francis Muthaura, the head of the Civil Service. He is not even able to speak authoritatively about the Government affairs as that responsibility is also effectively done by Dr. Alfred Mutua, the official Government spokesman.
After a year of frustration the ODM demanded the renegotiation of the pact that would make sure Raila got more powers and more jobs for his supporters. That demand was ridiculed by many including Kofi Annan who masterminded the Grand Coalition Government. Raila was left with no other option but to use other tricks to achieve his goals. Hence the surprise Kilaguni agenda followed by open hostility against Kibaki.
The controversial items in the Raila agenda at the Kilaguni include protocol and pecking order, security, remuneration , diplomatic treatment, decision making and Government communication, office of the Government spokesman, appointment of PSs, ambassadors , high commissioners, senior military officers, Public Service Commission, NSIS and Police.
Examining the issue of protocol may appear to be trivial as the debate about who has more powers between Raila and Kalonzo Musyoka, the Vice President, ended a long time ago. This time Raila wants to be Mwai Kibaki’s equal – same pay, same respect concerning protocol matters and same security arrangements. The fact that Kibaki’s powers are defined in the Constitution complicates matters, hence the demand for renegotiation of the pact.
For a very long time Muthaura and Mutua have bothered the Prime Minister so much because he feels the two are doing his job and making him appear subordinate to the President. He also feels it is about time his supporters were recruited in the army, the police and the NSIS regardless of obvious problems that may be caused by such a move which politicizes the sensitive security institutions. Raila also feels his many disappointed supporters could be comforted by appointments to ambassadorial jobs and positions of PSs. Needless to say, the Kibaki team feels those changes could only be made over their dead bodies. Hence the current political stalemate. If the deadlock is not sorted out soon it may very well see the end of the coalition government which will come with more deadly consequences than what faced the country last year soon after the sham general elections.
Coming at a time when the country is facing serious economic and unemployment problems , the current political squabbles between leaders already in comfortable and extremely lucrative political jobs, shocks the ordinary Kenyans who are struggling to survive. Many of them live from hand to mouth and they are aware of the fact that they are suffering because the leaders want to be more comfortable. The people know that among the leaders are the most corrupt individuals who would not care if the people starved to death as they steal all the food and public funds. Yet they don’t even want to pay taxes!
The international community must also be equally shocked by the greed of Kenyan leaders. Condemnations from international quarters have been made about extrajudicial killings and incompetence in general and corruption in particular. Suggestions were made that both the Attorney General and the Police Commissioner should be retired in public interest. Realizing that his present powerful position is owed to the international intervention in shaping and structuring the coalition government, Raila was quick to echo the current international dissatisfaction with governance of Kenya.
Whereas they helped him join Kibaki in forming the current Government, the international community may not be quick in backing the present Raila scheme which may destabilize the country and the entire region. Besides that, the international community is also aware that among Raila’s team in the Government are also some people who have been accused of corruption and nepotism. In other words in Raila’s side of the Cabinet are just as many skeletons as they are in the Kibaki side.
If ever there will be any international intervention to solve the current political crisis in the country it will not seek for the renegotiation of the accord. The ODM team is aware of that eventuality and that is why their demands have now been camouflaged in the form of the Kilaguni agenda.
The likelihood of ordinary people picking up arms to fight as they did a year ago is extremely remote. The people have learnt a lesson about who suffers and who gains when they are made to shed their blood to protect the very rich whose concern is only to get even richer. This however does not mean that the country cannot see another bloodbath as it witnessed a little bit more than a year ago. The fact is that there are many well organized gangster organizations that are ready to commit murder and other crimes on behalf of the politicians with a lot of stolen money.
One of the topics that was not discussed at the aborted Kilaguni meeting was the adoption of the Waki Report which, among other things , makes recommendations on how to deal with the criminals among our leaders who were instrumental for the death of well over 1,000 people about a year ago. They were also responsible for the desperate fate of well over 300,000 who were made homeless in their own country as a result of the clashes. Some of the suspects whose names are said to be in the Kofi Annan envelop were at the Kilaguni resort when the talks aborted. They must be extremely happy people now that the Waki Report has been forgotten because of disagreement among our leaders. What a terrible shame.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Hard Task for the Kenyan TJRC
Unless some of our top political leaders have a secret agenda, the hope for a long lasting peace in Kenya lies in the two Bills published by the Minister for Justice, National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs, Martha Karua. According to the Memorandum of Objects and Reasons the first one – The National Ethnic and Race Relations Commission Bill, 2008 – seeks to establish a National Ethnic and Race Relations Commission that will be charged with the responsibility of facilitating and promoting equality of opportunity, good relations, harmonious and peaceful co-existence between the various Kenyan ethnic communities.
Such a Bill could only be opposed by those who have reaped political benefit from bad relations between communities. There are quite a number of MPs who would never have been elected to Parliament without sowing seeds of ethnic discord in their constituencies. They promised their voters to inherit the well stocked shops and fertile farms belonging to “foreigners” living in the Rift Valley. Yet the majority of the so called “foreigners” were actually Kenyans of different ethnic groups and the shops they had were established through sheer hard work. The majority of the fertile farms they owned were actually bought from the local communities decades ago.
Martha Karua’s memorandum says the Bill is borne of the realization that the lasting peace and co-existence cannot prevail in Kenya unless the various Kenyan communities cultivate goodwill among each other and have equal access to various opportunities that may arise without discrimination grounded in ethnicity. The memorandum further says the Bill recognizes the need to deal effectively with the negative aspects of tribalism and ethnicity which has pervaded various levels of Kenyan society. Very noble words indeed! But the question is how the country can be expected to “deal effectively” with the negative aspects of tribalism when that aspect happens to be the side of some powerful MPs’ bread that is buttered.
The first signs of resistance against dealing effectively with negative ethnicity were shown by some MPs who openly resisted the resettlement of IDPs in their former farms and homes. They were coming up with some ridiculous conditions such as a blanket amnesty for suspected murderers and arsonists. No one says there should be no amnesty for some innocent participants in the mayhem that befell our country soon after the messed-up elections of last year. But that amnesty should not be extended to some people who committed the most heinous crimes this country has ever witnessed.
Recent utterances of some politicians reveal that they know something about who masterminded the crimes; otherwise they would not be calling for the release of “heroes who fought for democracy”. A terribly dangerous example will be set by releasing people who committed mass murders and burnt other people’s property at random .If and when they get away with this, we will all be living at the mercy of hooliganism and organized gangsters .
The demand by some politicians to have the perpetrators of post election crimes set free clearly also indicates that the militias are actually on hire by very important people. These VIPs owe their top jobs to hooligans who terrorized voters during election times. If any MP opposes this particular Bill which Martha Karua says emanates from the deliberations of the National Dialogue and Reconciliation Committee, that MP cannot be taken seriously when he or she condemns tribalism in our society. Indeed Martha Karua reminds us that the dialogue was formed after a political crisis ensued following a dispute on the outcome of the Presidential elections held on 27th December last year.
Martha Karua happens to be one of Kenyan politicians who take a very firm stand in whatever they believe in. The politicians are normally called “hardliners” and they are there in both the PNU and ODM camps. Whatever she says, therefore, is scrutinized thoroughly to find out whether it is meant to promote her political beliefs. This Bill could and indeed should be subjected to such a scrutiny.
Whatever conclusion people make about what Martha Karua says, she is absolutely right when she reminds us that last year’s political crisis brought to the surface deep-seated and log standing divisions within the Kenyan society and that to heal those divisions, a raft of constitutional, legal and political measures have to be taken. The publication of the two Bills is the first step by the Minister towards bridging the separations in our society.
The second Bill – The Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission Bill, 2008 – is a bit more controversial. It is difficult to establish justice without the truth being known. From time immemorial Governments all over the world have been economical with the truth and the Kenyan Government is not the exception. From April last year, for example, a Freedom of Information Bill was published but very lackadaisical efforts have been taken by the authorities to change it into anAct.
So instead of people’s right to know being promoted by the Government, it enforces the notorious CAP 187 Official Secrets Act. This horrible Legislation is an act of Parliament intended to provide for the preservation of State Secrets and State Security. It sounds very colonial indeed but surprisingly it is not. The Act, in fact, came into effect on the 16th February, 1968. This was long after Kenya attained its independence which says a lot about our African Governments.
For a TJRC to be effective an enabling environment must be created in which the truth can be told without any fear or favour. But for that to be done properly, that truth must be available in the first place. According to Clause 5 (a) of the Bill there are intentions of establishing accurate , complete and historical records of violations and abuses of human rights and economic rights inflicted on persons by the State, public institutions and holders of public office, both serving and retired , between 12th December , 1963 and 26th February 2008.
That sounds very noble indeed but the Bill has some clauses and sections that appear to be creating hindrances for the Commissions that will be established ,to get access to some information. The Commissions will , for example , according to Section 26 (1), not have any powers to search any premises suspected to contain any record or property or thing relevant to investigation without and ex-parte application to the Court for a warrant to conduct such a search. Now we all know what can happen to any proceedings in our courts.
May be the most controversial part of the second Bill is to be found in Section 38 (1) allowing the Commission to make amnesty recommendations for any violations committed during the period 12th December , 1963 to February 28, 2008. In the Bill’s Memorandum of Objects and Reasons, Martha Karua rightly says that the intended law is borne of the realization that lasting peace and co-existence cannot prevail in Kenya unless historical injustices and violation and abuse of human rights have been addressed. How is that possible when the team to perform the task of seeking justice is made to jump so many huddles? How is that possible also when amnesty will be so easy to obtain?
It is the hope of many Kenyans that a lot of skeletons in our cupboards will be exposed by the TJRC which will make its hearings, according to the Bills’ Section 25 (1) , in public. Unfortunately this section is immediately contradicted by subsection (2) which creates provisions for some proceedings to be heard in camera. Which means some secrets about a few individuals who have been looting this country since independence will always be secrets. What a shame!
The only consolation is the fact that the two Bills are not being rushed through Parliament and there will be plenty of time to discuss them and amend them accordingly at the appropriate time.
Such a Bill could only be opposed by those who have reaped political benefit from bad relations between communities. There are quite a number of MPs who would never have been elected to Parliament without sowing seeds of ethnic discord in their constituencies. They promised their voters to inherit the well stocked shops and fertile farms belonging to “foreigners” living in the Rift Valley. Yet the majority of the so called “foreigners” were actually Kenyans of different ethnic groups and the shops they had were established through sheer hard work. The majority of the fertile farms they owned were actually bought from the local communities decades ago.
Martha Karua’s memorandum says the Bill is borne of the realization that the lasting peace and co-existence cannot prevail in Kenya unless the various Kenyan communities cultivate goodwill among each other and have equal access to various opportunities that may arise without discrimination grounded in ethnicity. The memorandum further says the Bill recognizes the need to deal effectively with the negative aspects of tribalism and ethnicity which has pervaded various levels of Kenyan society. Very noble words indeed! But the question is how the country can be expected to “deal effectively” with the negative aspects of tribalism when that aspect happens to be the side of some powerful MPs’ bread that is buttered.
The first signs of resistance against dealing effectively with negative ethnicity were shown by some MPs who openly resisted the resettlement of IDPs in their former farms and homes. They were coming up with some ridiculous conditions such as a blanket amnesty for suspected murderers and arsonists. No one says there should be no amnesty for some innocent participants in the mayhem that befell our country soon after the messed-up elections of last year. But that amnesty should not be extended to some people who committed the most heinous crimes this country has ever witnessed.
Recent utterances of some politicians reveal that they know something about who masterminded the crimes; otherwise they would not be calling for the release of “heroes who fought for democracy”. A terribly dangerous example will be set by releasing people who committed mass murders and burnt other people’s property at random .If and when they get away with this, we will all be living at the mercy of hooliganism and organized gangsters .
The demand by some politicians to have the perpetrators of post election crimes set free clearly also indicates that the militias are actually on hire by very important people. These VIPs owe their top jobs to hooligans who terrorized voters during election times. If any MP opposes this particular Bill which Martha Karua says emanates from the deliberations of the National Dialogue and Reconciliation Committee, that MP cannot be taken seriously when he or she condemns tribalism in our society. Indeed Martha Karua reminds us that the dialogue was formed after a political crisis ensued following a dispute on the outcome of the Presidential elections held on 27th December last year.
Martha Karua happens to be one of Kenyan politicians who take a very firm stand in whatever they believe in. The politicians are normally called “hardliners” and they are there in both the PNU and ODM camps. Whatever she says, therefore, is scrutinized thoroughly to find out whether it is meant to promote her political beliefs. This Bill could and indeed should be subjected to such a scrutiny.
Whatever conclusion people make about what Martha Karua says, she is absolutely right when she reminds us that last year’s political crisis brought to the surface deep-seated and log standing divisions within the Kenyan society and that to heal those divisions, a raft of constitutional, legal and political measures have to be taken. The publication of the two Bills is the first step by the Minister towards bridging the separations in our society.
The second Bill – The Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission Bill, 2008 – is a bit more controversial. It is difficult to establish justice without the truth being known. From time immemorial Governments all over the world have been economical with the truth and the Kenyan Government is not the exception. From April last year, for example, a Freedom of Information Bill was published but very lackadaisical efforts have been taken by the authorities to change it into anAct.
So instead of people’s right to know being promoted by the Government, it enforces the notorious CAP 187 Official Secrets Act. This horrible Legislation is an act of Parliament intended to provide for the preservation of State Secrets and State Security. It sounds very colonial indeed but surprisingly it is not. The Act, in fact, came into effect on the 16th February, 1968. This was long after Kenya attained its independence which says a lot about our African Governments.
For a TJRC to be effective an enabling environment must be created in which the truth can be told without any fear or favour. But for that to be done properly, that truth must be available in the first place. According to Clause 5 (a) of the Bill there are intentions of establishing accurate , complete and historical records of violations and abuses of human rights and economic rights inflicted on persons by the State, public institutions and holders of public office, both serving and retired , between 12th December , 1963 and 26th February 2008.
That sounds very noble indeed but the Bill has some clauses and sections that appear to be creating hindrances for the Commissions that will be established ,to get access to some information. The Commissions will , for example , according to Section 26 (1), not have any powers to search any premises suspected to contain any record or property or thing relevant to investigation without and ex-parte application to the Court for a warrant to conduct such a search. Now we all know what can happen to any proceedings in our courts.
May be the most controversial part of the second Bill is to be found in Section 38 (1) allowing the Commission to make amnesty recommendations for any violations committed during the period 12th December , 1963 to February 28, 2008. In the Bill’s Memorandum of Objects and Reasons, Martha Karua rightly says that the intended law is borne of the realization that lasting peace and co-existence cannot prevail in Kenya unless historical injustices and violation and abuse of human rights have been addressed. How is that possible when the team to perform the task of seeking justice is made to jump so many huddles? How is that possible also when amnesty will be so easy to obtain?
It is the hope of many Kenyans that a lot of skeletons in our cupboards will be exposed by the TJRC which will make its hearings, according to the Bills’ Section 25 (1) , in public. Unfortunately this section is immediately contradicted by subsection (2) which creates provisions for some proceedings to be heard in camera. Which means some secrets about a few individuals who have been looting this country since independence will always be secrets. What a shame!
The only consolation is the fact that the two Bills are not being rushed through Parliament and there will be plenty of time to discuss them and amend them accordingly at the appropriate time.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
MPs Building Castles in the Air
Kenyan Parliamentarians’ propensity to build castles in the air is universally unconquerable. It is simply next to none in the whole world. They never seem to run short of ideas that shock. First they pass the absurd motion against the parties that sponsored them to Parliament by rebelliously trying to form a fictitious Grand Opposition. It is fictitious because it is threatening the very existence of the Coalition Government which has brought back peace to this country.
Then now they think they should have the powers to create ministries for the Government. As lawmakers they should know what the Constitution says about the issue. Section 16(2) of the Constitution says the President shall appoint the Ministers from among the members of the National Assembly. It does not say ministers shall be appointed by Parliament.
But Section 16(1) of the Constitution, however, says there shall be such offices of Minister of the Government of Kenya as may be established by Parliament or, subject to any provision made by Parliament, by the President. Does this mean ministries shall be created by Parliament? If so, why has it not happened before? Were ministries created unilaterally by the President against the Constitution? Why bring up the matter at this moment in time?
That notwithstanding Section 24 of the Constitution says the powers of constituting and abolishing offices for the Republic of Kenya, of making appointments to any such office and terminating any such appointment, shall vest in the President.
The powers to appoint Ministers and create ministries do not rest on the President alone. According to the National Accord and Reconciliation Act, 2008, the Prime Minister has similar powers in the formation of the coalition Government. These powers are to be found in Section 4 (1,2and3) of the Act.
What must have happened when the current Government was formed and various ministries created by Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga, is that a lot of MPs expected to be in the new Cabinet. When many of them missed the boat they decided to show their powers as elected representatives of the people. Hence the call for a Grand Opposition and the suggestion that from now on they should be involved in the creation of ministries. Is there something that the MPs know that the rest of us don’t? Is there an internal split within ODM and PNU? Why this belated animosity against people who were hero-worshipped only three months ago?
Sure enough, looking at the ministries created by Kibaki and Raila is not a particularly pleasant exercise. Apart from its extraordinary monstrous size, and extremely expensive budget, some ministries look like mere departments of any serious Government. Jobs were definitely created for the boys. But that was to bring back peace after a lot of blood of innocent Kenyans was poured and thousands of our people – men, women, children and the aged – were made both homeless and dispossessed.
No price was too high to pay to re-establish peace after the whole country was almost torn to pieces by what resembled xenophobic nationalism. As a matter of fact, the problem has not completely been solved because there are still thousands of IDP yet to accept to return to their former homes, where the reception by the so called indigenous people still threatens to be hostile. I do not like calling those who are refusing to live with other Kenyans “indigenous” because every Kenyan, is, by birth, indigenous. There is no one who can claim to be more Kenyan than another Kenyan.
Instead of pocketing a lot of taxpayers’ money for debating hogwash subjects such as the formation of a Grand Opposition or who should be creating the Ministries, parliamentarians will appear to earn their salaries more legitimately by trying to solve the problem of IDP. The present trends in this Parliament exhibit the same calibre of greed as that of the one the voters have just fired. The fired group of MPs used the Legislature as a mint to make money. This one seems to be heading towards the same direction but in a rather circumlocutory manner, that shows some form of rebellion, for being left out of the Cabinet.
If the MPs want us to take them seriously they should immediately start sorting out the problem of some Kenyans thinking they are more important than other Kenyans. Traditionally we have always thought this was a characteristic of rich people who did not want to mix with the poor. But today things look different. The evil head of negative ethnicity is beginning to show its ugly face and may be some of the people responsible for the dirty work are sitting in Parliament today.
Suggestions have been made that real peace will come back to Kenya only when communities can communication between and among themselves. Dialogue between people who were fighting soon after last year’s elections must be started by all the people of goodwill. Among them should be members of Parliament who are too busy postponing peace talks instead of initiating them. Why? Because Raila and Kibaki forgot them when they were selecting Cabinet Ministers. So they must now disown both Raila and Kibaki. How shocking!
Some of them are suggesting that the hooligans who caused mayhem in December last year through murder and arson should be forgiven. That forgiveness will be the biggest mockery of justice. Martha Karua is right when she says everyone who was involved in the post election crimes must be brought to justice. That should be done as soon as possible because justice delayed is justice denied. She must also make sure that criminals from both sides are traced by the long arm of the law.
Justice must not only be done following the sad events of last year's elections, but it must manifestly be seen to be done. None of the criminals, for example, should be punished without revealing who paid them to commit the crimes. The paymasters of the criminals must also be made to face the music. Otherwise we can never be sure that these crimes will not be committed again and again.
Then now they think they should have the powers to create ministries for the Government. As lawmakers they should know what the Constitution says about the issue. Section 16(2) of the Constitution says the President shall appoint the Ministers from among the members of the National Assembly. It does not say ministers shall be appointed by Parliament.
But Section 16(1) of the Constitution, however, says there shall be such offices of Minister of the Government of Kenya as may be established by Parliament or, subject to any provision made by Parliament, by the President. Does this mean ministries shall be created by Parliament? If so, why has it not happened before? Were ministries created unilaterally by the President against the Constitution? Why bring up the matter at this moment in time?
That notwithstanding Section 24 of the Constitution says the powers of constituting and abolishing offices for the Republic of Kenya, of making appointments to any such office and terminating any such appointment, shall vest in the President.
The powers to appoint Ministers and create ministries do not rest on the President alone. According to the National Accord and Reconciliation Act, 2008, the Prime Minister has similar powers in the formation of the coalition Government. These powers are to be found in Section 4 (1,2and3) of the Act.
What must have happened when the current Government was formed and various ministries created by Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga, is that a lot of MPs expected to be in the new Cabinet. When many of them missed the boat they decided to show their powers as elected representatives of the people. Hence the call for a Grand Opposition and the suggestion that from now on they should be involved in the creation of ministries. Is there something that the MPs know that the rest of us don’t? Is there an internal split within ODM and PNU? Why this belated animosity against people who were hero-worshipped only three months ago?
Sure enough, looking at the ministries created by Kibaki and Raila is not a particularly pleasant exercise. Apart from its extraordinary monstrous size, and extremely expensive budget, some ministries look like mere departments of any serious Government. Jobs were definitely created for the boys. But that was to bring back peace after a lot of blood of innocent Kenyans was poured and thousands of our people – men, women, children and the aged – were made both homeless and dispossessed.
No price was too high to pay to re-establish peace after the whole country was almost torn to pieces by what resembled xenophobic nationalism. As a matter of fact, the problem has not completely been solved because there are still thousands of IDP yet to accept to return to their former homes, where the reception by the so called indigenous people still threatens to be hostile. I do not like calling those who are refusing to live with other Kenyans “indigenous” because every Kenyan, is, by birth, indigenous. There is no one who can claim to be more Kenyan than another Kenyan.
Instead of pocketing a lot of taxpayers’ money for debating hogwash subjects such as the formation of a Grand Opposition or who should be creating the Ministries, parliamentarians will appear to earn their salaries more legitimately by trying to solve the problem of IDP. The present trends in this Parliament exhibit the same calibre of greed as that of the one the voters have just fired. The fired group of MPs used the Legislature as a mint to make money. This one seems to be heading towards the same direction but in a rather circumlocutory manner, that shows some form of rebellion, for being left out of the Cabinet.
If the MPs want us to take them seriously they should immediately start sorting out the problem of some Kenyans thinking they are more important than other Kenyans. Traditionally we have always thought this was a characteristic of rich people who did not want to mix with the poor. But today things look different. The evil head of negative ethnicity is beginning to show its ugly face and may be some of the people responsible for the dirty work are sitting in Parliament today.
Suggestions have been made that real peace will come back to Kenya only when communities can communication between and among themselves. Dialogue between people who were fighting soon after last year’s elections must be started by all the people of goodwill. Among them should be members of Parliament who are too busy postponing peace talks instead of initiating them. Why? Because Raila and Kibaki forgot them when they were selecting Cabinet Ministers. So they must now disown both Raila and Kibaki. How shocking!
Some of them are suggesting that the hooligans who caused mayhem in December last year through murder and arson should be forgiven. That forgiveness will be the biggest mockery of justice. Martha Karua is right when she says everyone who was involved in the post election crimes must be brought to justice. That should be done as soon as possible because justice delayed is justice denied. She must also make sure that criminals from both sides are traced by the long arm of the law.
Justice must not only be done following the sad events of last year's elections, but it must manifestly be seen to be done. None of the criminals, for example, should be punished without revealing who paid them to commit the crimes. The paymasters of the criminals must also be made to face the music. Otherwise we can never be sure that these crimes will not be committed again and again.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Raila Outwitted Mt. Kenya Mafia
Politically Raila is equal to Mwai Kibaki. Constitutionally Kibaki is head and shoulders above Agwambo, but only as a figurehead. Governmentally they paddle in the same canoe. This is the position Kenya is in today because of Raila’s ability to outwit the Mount Kenya Mafia, which has been constantly stabbing him in the back every time he comes to some agreement with Mwai Kibaki. Raila has learnt how to deal with the Gema sharks after a bitter lesson that threw him out of governmental powers in 2005 though he still remained politically very powerful.
This is not the first time Kibaki and Raila have established a political agreement. When they made the first attempt before the 2002 general elections, they signed the now infamous MoU which created the post of an Executive Prime Minister for Raila. The many political parties that formed Narc to oust Kanu from power were to be guided by the Summit made up of Moody Awori as its chairman and George Saitoti, Raila Odinga, Kalonzo Musyoka, Kipruto arap Kirwa, Charity Ngilu, Mwai Kibaki and Michael Wamalwa as its members.
If the Summit was not dissolved by the Mt. Kenya Mafia soon after Mwai Kibaki was first sworn in as the third President of Kenya, the chances would have been the current strong coalition Government would have been established as long ago as 2003. The Narc Government would have grown into the kind of a Grand Coalition we have today. But the Gema leaders around Mwai Kibaki would hear nothing about the Summit. They also did not want the Constitution changed to create the post of a prime Minister despite the existence of the MoU.
Political animosity between Raila Odinga and the Gema group around Mwai Kibaki started at that time when a handful of extremely rich people from Central Province claimed that the Summit could not be above the Cabinet. At hat time John Michuki, who was the Minister for Transport and Communication, said the Summit should be dissolved because its continued existence undermined the Presidency. His son in law, who was the Mukurwini MP, Mutahi Kagwe, said there was no need for constitutional changes because Mwai Kibaki should be allowed to continue ruling Kenya for five years under the old constitution which made a demigod out of the President.
In an article published by The Standard on April 5th, 2003, I condemned the statements by the two and said: The statements by these two leaders are in poor taste and contribute to a public disservice which threatens the unprecedented co-operation and unity among Kenyan leaders that made Narc win the elections.
The perilously arrogant statements from the Central Province MPs resembled the conceited Kanu braggadocio which led to its downfall. The people could then see that the statements by Gema leaders were an uncomfortable blend of power hunger and disregard for wananchi’s feelings which were not a particularly appealing combination. Wananchi, who backed Narc to remove Kanu from power, could at that time see that things were not shaping up as they expected. There were practical and moral problems embedded in the Narc crisis. What seemed to bother most Kenyans at that time were the new jingoistic Mount Kenya Mafia’s ways of interpreting events even when their methods went against the moral and honest spirit of co-operation between political leaders from all corners of the country.
Naturally, there were serious practical hurdles to jump before the clique’s ambition could be fulfilled. If they needed to remain in power they had to be supported by the majority of Members of Parliament who at that time did not seem to be delighted by the trend to have Gema people dominate in almost all important Government positions. Indeed the entire political scenario put the power clique around Kibaki out of balance as it was typified by parliamentary rebellion which forced the government to withdraw some vital Bills from the order paper.
To many people the vitriol spewed by Michuki and Kagwe showed they harboured political ambition which was occasionally unleashed by recklessness in their speech. Wananchi were eager to see which of the Narc leaders would have the decency, integrity and honour to uphold the unity among the people and which ones among them would exhibit a diminutive mentality that would disregard human decency that required them to honour promises made to the masses of Kenya.
The squabbles in Narc proved that the Government was not functioning the way the coalition expected it to and many Kenyans were surprised when there was not even a time line on how the new party was to be reorganized. The failure of the Summit to meet and sort out Narc problems had influenced opinion right across the country in such a manner as to threaten to erode the goodwill they had so far succeeded to establish. To many Kenyans the objective of a few people around Kibaki was not only to accumulate power but to hijack Narc - a political task they could hardly achieve without the co-operation of the Summit.
It was obvious that the Narc coalition was so much concerned about winning the 2002 election that it paid little attention to post-election settlements. Little did anyone suspect that the Mount Kenya group would run the show after victory. But if that regime was to survive the crisis it was going through then it had, as much as possible, to involve all the original leaders of Narc. Wananchi wanted to see a hybrid administration running the country when the people were engaged in the process of reshaping the constitution along the lines recommended by Prof Yash Pal Ghai.
Ghai had created a constitutional revolution and made Kenyans ponder the question of governance. With every appointment announced by Kibaki, therefore, came an elaborate collection of ethnicity data by the people. This was done to enhance an early identification of any tendency of favouring any group. Among other things, the evaluation proved that the people who had in the past vehemently opposed Raila Odinga’s leadership in Nyanza were favourably considered by Kibaki’s administration for top jobs. These included Ndolo Ayah, who had always been a staunch Kanu supporter, and Dr Shem Ochuodho, who had refused to follow Raila in his short association with Daniel arap Moi’s Kanu. This also proved Kibaki did not rely on Raila’s guidance in appointing people from Nyanza to high government positions. Kibaki’s unilateral appointments were of course protected by the constitution but in some quarter they were seen as a failure in democracy as they hijacked the collective responsibility of the Narc Summit.
It seemed that what was then euphemistically known as the ‘Six-Ms’ and other close friends of the President did not understand how angry wananchi became when they saw a concentration of members of one ethnic group in top public offices. The battles between factions in Narc never ended when leaders continued to look at all appointments from an ethnic point of view. And the fight was intensified when the constitutional conference began.
Yet this game of ethnic favoritism was started by Jomo Kenyatta himself, and then perfected by Daniel Moi. People hoped it would be ended by Mwai Kibaki. But the country was shocked during Kibaki’s first term to see the appointment of elders of questionable modern management skills getting very important jobs. The new bosses almost all came from around Mt. Kenya. This made the Bomas constitutional conference think more of devolution of powers through a prime minister rather than supporting a strong unitary government under a powerful president. The country was run by an administration that had so many differences within it. The appointment of friends of the President to important positions also created a big split within Narc.
So when Kofi Annan came to Kenya to mediate peace following the post election clashes of last year, Raila had the hindsight of what really went wrong with Narc. This time he made sure the position of a Prime Minister was not only made into a statutory law but also incorporated in the Constitution itself. In that way he really outwitted the Mt. Kenya Mafia.
This is not the first time Kibaki and Raila have established a political agreement. When they made the first attempt before the 2002 general elections, they signed the now infamous MoU which created the post of an Executive Prime Minister for Raila. The many political parties that formed Narc to oust Kanu from power were to be guided by the Summit made up of Moody Awori as its chairman and George Saitoti, Raila Odinga, Kalonzo Musyoka, Kipruto arap Kirwa, Charity Ngilu, Mwai Kibaki and Michael Wamalwa as its members.
If the Summit was not dissolved by the Mt. Kenya Mafia soon after Mwai Kibaki was first sworn in as the third President of Kenya, the chances would have been the current strong coalition Government would have been established as long ago as 2003. The Narc Government would have grown into the kind of a Grand Coalition we have today. But the Gema leaders around Mwai Kibaki would hear nothing about the Summit. They also did not want the Constitution changed to create the post of a prime Minister despite the existence of the MoU.
Political animosity between Raila Odinga and the Gema group around Mwai Kibaki started at that time when a handful of extremely rich people from Central Province claimed that the Summit could not be above the Cabinet. At hat time John Michuki, who was the Minister for Transport and Communication, said the Summit should be dissolved because its continued existence undermined the Presidency. His son in law, who was the Mukurwini MP, Mutahi Kagwe, said there was no need for constitutional changes because Mwai Kibaki should be allowed to continue ruling Kenya for five years under the old constitution which made a demigod out of the President.
In an article published by The Standard on April 5th, 2003, I condemned the statements by the two and said: The statements by these two leaders are in poor taste and contribute to a public disservice which threatens the unprecedented co-operation and unity among Kenyan leaders that made Narc win the elections.
The perilously arrogant statements from the Central Province MPs resembled the conceited Kanu braggadocio which led to its downfall. The people could then see that the statements by Gema leaders were an uncomfortable blend of power hunger and disregard for wananchi’s feelings which were not a particularly appealing combination. Wananchi, who backed Narc to remove Kanu from power, could at that time see that things were not shaping up as they expected. There were practical and moral problems embedded in the Narc crisis. What seemed to bother most Kenyans at that time were the new jingoistic Mount Kenya Mafia’s ways of interpreting events even when their methods went against the moral and honest spirit of co-operation between political leaders from all corners of the country.
Naturally, there were serious practical hurdles to jump before the clique’s ambition could be fulfilled. If they needed to remain in power they had to be supported by the majority of Members of Parliament who at that time did not seem to be delighted by the trend to have Gema people dominate in almost all important Government positions. Indeed the entire political scenario put the power clique around Kibaki out of balance as it was typified by parliamentary rebellion which forced the government to withdraw some vital Bills from the order paper.
To many people the vitriol spewed by Michuki and Kagwe showed they harboured political ambition which was occasionally unleashed by recklessness in their speech. Wananchi were eager to see which of the Narc leaders would have the decency, integrity and honour to uphold the unity among the people and which ones among them would exhibit a diminutive mentality that would disregard human decency that required them to honour promises made to the masses of Kenya.
The squabbles in Narc proved that the Government was not functioning the way the coalition expected it to and many Kenyans were surprised when there was not even a time line on how the new party was to be reorganized. The failure of the Summit to meet and sort out Narc problems had influenced opinion right across the country in such a manner as to threaten to erode the goodwill they had so far succeeded to establish. To many Kenyans the objective of a few people around Kibaki was not only to accumulate power but to hijack Narc - a political task they could hardly achieve without the co-operation of the Summit.
It was obvious that the Narc coalition was so much concerned about winning the 2002 election that it paid little attention to post-election settlements. Little did anyone suspect that the Mount Kenya group would run the show after victory. But if that regime was to survive the crisis it was going through then it had, as much as possible, to involve all the original leaders of Narc. Wananchi wanted to see a hybrid administration running the country when the people were engaged in the process of reshaping the constitution along the lines recommended by Prof Yash Pal Ghai.
Ghai had created a constitutional revolution and made Kenyans ponder the question of governance. With every appointment announced by Kibaki, therefore, came an elaborate collection of ethnicity data by the people. This was done to enhance an early identification of any tendency of favouring any group. Among other things, the evaluation proved that the people who had in the past vehemently opposed Raila Odinga’s leadership in Nyanza were favourably considered by Kibaki’s administration for top jobs. These included Ndolo Ayah, who had always been a staunch Kanu supporter, and Dr Shem Ochuodho, who had refused to follow Raila in his short association with Daniel arap Moi’s Kanu. This also proved Kibaki did not rely on Raila’s guidance in appointing people from Nyanza to high government positions. Kibaki’s unilateral appointments were of course protected by the constitution but in some quarter they were seen as a failure in democracy as they hijacked the collective responsibility of the Narc Summit.
It seemed that what was then euphemistically known as the ‘Six-Ms’ and other close friends of the President did not understand how angry wananchi became when they saw a concentration of members of one ethnic group in top public offices. The battles between factions in Narc never ended when leaders continued to look at all appointments from an ethnic point of view. And the fight was intensified when the constitutional conference began.
Yet this game of ethnic favoritism was started by Jomo Kenyatta himself, and then perfected by Daniel Moi. People hoped it would be ended by Mwai Kibaki. But the country was shocked during Kibaki’s first term to see the appointment of elders of questionable modern management skills getting very important jobs. The new bosses almost all came from around Mt. Kenya. This made the Bomas constitutional conference think more of devolution of powers through a prime minister rather than supporting a strong unitary government under a powerful president. The country was run by an administration that had so many differences within it. The appointment of friends of the President to important positions also created a big split within Narc.
So when Kofi Annan came to Kenya to mediate peace following the post election clashes of last year, Raila had the hindsight of what really went wrong with Narc. This time he made sure the position of a Prime Minister was not only made into a statutory law but also incorporated in the Constitution itself. In that way he really outwitted the Mt. Kenya Mafia.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
