Luis Moreno-Ocampo couldn’t be happier. His work has been made a lot easier by the American Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, who visited Kenya and stirred up debate about the trial of the suspected planners and financiers of the post election mass murders. No sooner did the Secretary of State jump into her plane than backbenchers, led by Gitobu Imanyara, announce a plan to introduce Mutula’s Bill, which the Cabinet had rejected, to Parliament through the back door in the form of a private members’ Bill. The Imenti Central MP told journalists his Bill had borrowed heavily from Mutula’s.
Whether Imanyara’s Bill goes through or not, it proves there is a major rift that has developed between Parliament and the Cabinet. MPs seem to have their ears on the ground and their eyes on their constituencies. Many of them now know the Cabinet in Kenya is as unpopular as George Bush was at the end of his term. The reason for its unpopularity is the stand it has taken on Moreno-Ocampo’s efforts to prosecute some members of the Cabinet for plotting and financing the post election murders. The people are behind Moreno-Ocampo. And the backbenchers have joined the people with their new Bill which, among other things, also wants the planners of the post election bloodbath to face the ICC in The Hague. Few people have read the Bill, but Imanyara says he plans to put it on a special website which the backbenchers plan to launch.
All these new developments seem to have taken place when the American Secretary of State engaged Kenyans in an open debate about the trial of the planners of the conflicts. Her visit achieved many things and among them is the exposure of our MPs who have no time to discuss anything with the people they represent in Parliament. No wonder Imanyara now wants to launch a website to discuss his Bill with the people. Without Hillary Clinton’s visit that set that example, Imanyara’s move would not have been possible. Hillary has removed MPs from their artificial ivory tower and completely changed politics in Kenya.
It was all started by her candidness when she told Kenyan politicians that the International Criminal Court prosecutor was on his way to charge suspect of post election violence planners and financiers. While she was visiting Kenya to deliver the keynote address at the AGOA conference, she took advantage of her presence in the country to talk to the Kenyan politicians about the importance of prosecuting the suspects locally. But then she discovered, to her horror, that the leaders had a plan to forgive the suspects through a stage managed trial by the newly established TJRC. She had to go public and tell Kenyans that there was no way the culprits could escape the long arm of the international law.
Before she did that, she came to Kenya convinced that the Kenyan Government was making efforts to establish a local tribunal that would have given the country an opportunity to solve its own problem. Soon she discovered that the Cabinet was badly divided with some people systematically planning to make the whole post election violence forgotten through the TJRC. This group must have argued that prosecuting senior political leaders would make their followers rise up in arms. It didn’t take her long to realize the TJRC solution was being championed by some of the suspects in the Cabinet. Mrs. Clinton, therefore, didn’t buy the TJRC story. But she also realized there were some leaders in the Cabinet who wanted post election trials to go to The Hague as Kenyans had lost all respect for the local courts.
Addressing a press conference in Nairobi she said she had been told by Kenyan Ministers that there was a constitutional impediment to creating a local tribunal outside the ordinary judicial system, and that there was required to be a constitutional amendment in order to create a local tribunal, which had not passed the Kenyan Parliament. Though the Secretary of State would have preferred Kenyans to establish a credible local tribunal, it seemed there was no escaping the ICC. Then she added: “I know this is not easy. I understand how complicated this is. It’s complicated, in part, because politically how do you go about prosecuting the perpetrators without engendering more violence from those who are supportive of the positions or the affiliations of the perpetrators. So it does take a lot of political will and leadership.” Those words must have made Imanyara and his growing number of backbench supporters start thinking of hijacking the Mutula Bill, which in fact had absolutely nothing wrong with it except the unacceptable suggestion to the Gema group that the President losses his immunity when it comes to the post election violence prosecutions.
Mrs. Clinton said America continued to believe that a special local tribunal was in the best interest of Kenya, so as to avoid having outsiders determine the outcome of such trials. But she reminded Kenyans that Kofi Annan and the people working with him had handed a sealed envelope of ten names to the ICC, which had a lot on its plate. The ICC was not acting immediately, of course, because there was hope that Kenya would resolve this matter on its own, and that was certainly the American hope as well. That too made Imanyara start working on the Mutula Bill to make it provide for the use of both local tribunals and The Hague.
The manner in which the former American First Lady presented her case clearly indicated that she knew quite a bit about what was going on in Kenya. The perpetrators had followers who were probably planning to cause more trouble in the country should their leaders end up in court facing murder charges. With that knowledge in mind she obviously easily understood why the majority of Kenyans preferred the matter was taken to The Hague. The hope the Secretary of State had in wishing Kenyans to establish their own local court to try the perpetrators changed when she addressed a huge crowd at the University of Nairobi the next day. There she said she had seen a poll which indicated that the majority of Kenyans agreed with the Waki Commission which suggested that the final solution should be at The Hague. She then added: “And in my conversations, even with ministers in the government who understand how important it is to deal with this matter, they too have said that probably that is the only road forward.”
As an outsider, Mrs. Clinton said, that was not something that she could play a role in, but she thought it was important that a decision was made. And If there was not going to be a special local tribunal that had confidence of the people, then she thought the people deserved to know that someone was going to put in motion the process to hold people accountable, and it may well be that that was the ICC. It took the Secretary of State less than two days to know that Kenyans have no confidence in the courts and that the only hope of justice being done was in the ICC. After that Imanyara started the ball rolling. Soon there will really be political drama in Kenya about the trials of the post election violence planners. It is the moment Moreno-Ocampo was waiting for. Undoubtedly he is bound to strike very soon.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Thursday, August 6, 2009
Hillary’s Kenyan visit exposed wounds
Hillary Clinton’s Africa visit was a great success. Nowhere was that success more visible than at the University of Nairobi’s discussions dubbed Open Dialogue. Meeting students from various universities and leaders of the country’s civil society, the Secretary of State managed to stir up nationalistic emotions throughout the country when she candidly gave Kenyans an impressive shopping list of things to do to end impunity and corruption in the country. The most worried group of people listening to Mrs. Clinton must have been the Kenyan political leaders who are the obvious stumbling block to Kenya’s political, social and economic progress. The cheering audience was pleased to hear the most powerful woman in the world saying that from now onwards, America was planning to target individuals who planned and financed the post election violence that saw the death of over 1,000 and the displacement of well over 300,000 homeless men women and children.
In the audience was another prominent lady, Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize who touched a nerve when she asked a question about China’s involvement in Africa today. Coated in the most diplomatic language the question to Hillary was what America was planning to do to salvage Africa from neo-colonial exploitation, which is being done by China through corrupt business partnership with powerful political leaders. That question let the cat out of the bag. It exposed the fact that the big Chinese developmental projects of building roads, hospitals and housing schemes are all hiding corrupt deals between Shanghai and African leaders. The big question is: Who are the African leaders engaged in the crooked contracts with the Chinese? Obviously billions of dollars are involved in the deals, though roads are in the end built and other assignments are finally done.
From the Hillary visit has come out this shocking revelation of corruption organized between African countries and the newly established global economic giants such as China. This is the one type of corruption which journalists have to expose. It involves billions of dollars and is spread in almost every African country. Obviously Wangari Maathai has stepped on an extremely sensitive toe and she is likely to be met with formidable opposition from extremely powerful people. Journalists in Kenya should not let her fight that important battle single handedly.
Hillary’s theme throughout her most stimulating discussions was the question of Governance covered by the Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation principles on long term issues and solutions, commonly known as Agenda Four. She let the cat out of the bag when she said America believed there were some Kenyan leaders who were genuinely committed to reforms in the Constitutional, electoral, judicial and the police matters. The manner in which she came out openly defending Prime Minister Raila Odinga when a critic tried to ridicule him for rejecting American “lectures” on Governance , clearly proved that the leaders she had in mind were in ODM spearhead by Agwambo.
As the Secretary of State was entering the University campus she read a sign board saying “You are now entering a corruption free zone.” That gave her the words she used in her opening remarks at Open Dialogue when she told Kenyans to make sure the slogan expanded throughout the country. The challenge she was making was to the civil society and to the youth of Kenya who all were posing their questions to her in such a manner as to beg for financial assistance to help their various NGOs.
In the audience there were no conspicuous leaders of any trade union organizations and no religious leaders but the academicians and professionals at the University’s Taifa Hall paused such anti-government questions that clearly indicated they were thoroughly disgusted with the current leadership in Kenya. They were all asking for American assistance to engage in sensitization crusades to educate Kenyans about their political rights. Hillary had a few hints to the Kenyans. They could use the present vibrant Fourth Estate to make sure corruption among the leaders and other evils in society were regularly exposed. She virtually asked journalists and the civil society not to give up the struggle as that was the manner in which her own country was liberated to an extent of having a black man at the White House today.
Hillary Clinton had two very important examples that she gave to Kenyan journalists about what to write about. The first one was from Botswana, where the discovery of diamond had benefited all the people through visible progress in infrastructure and other developmental projects. And the second one was what was happening in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which is the complete opposite of what is happening in Botswana. In the Congo, which has one of the richest mineral resources in the world, people were still slaughtering one another for wealth. Nigeria, for example, still imported oil products when it was the world’s fifth producer of oil. All these were good stories which showed the importance of good governance in Africa.
Hillary found herself in a minefield when she was answering a question from a student of conflict resolution from the DRC who wanted to know what America was doing to stop multinationals from financing the war in Goma. Needless to say among the multinationals came from her own country. She had to admit those were the kind of exposes journalists were expected to do to draw the attention of the world about international crooks who help Africa under develop.
The discussion at Taifa Hall will most certainly change the political landscape in Kenya. It has helped young Kenyans realize that they have to do something to reject the current corrupt and obsolete political leadership in the country. Hillary’s hint was clear – something has to be done to establish truly democratic political parties in readiness for the next elections in 2012. After all it is through the formation of tribal political parties that Kenyan leaders have taken over power in the country. Kenya is extremely lucky to have a very large number of highly educated young men and women who are ready to play more realistic and meaningfully effective roles in the economic, social and political spheres in the country.
A young lady from Mombasa asked the Secretary of State an extremely sensitive question about marginalization of Muslim women in Kenya. It was a sensitive question because Kenyan Muslims do not want to be criticized no matter what evils thy do in the name of Islam. Hillary was so moved by the question from the Mombasa girl that she asked for particulars of the questioners, with a view of building bridges with her. At the end of the discussions it was very clear that the Secretary of State had hit the nail on its head. She had virtually mobilized young Kenyan to lawfully fight for their rights. The result of her visit to Kenya will become visible in 2012 when, hopefully, all the Agenda Four reforms will have been achieved.
Posted by I am a at 5:42 AM
In the audience was another prominent lady, Wangari Maathai, the 2004 winner of the Nobel Peace Prize who touched a nerve when she asked a question about China’s involvement in Africa today. Coated in the most diplomatic language the question to Hillary was what America was planning to do to salvage Africa from neo-colonial exploitation, which is being done by China through corrupt business partnership with powerful political leaders. That question let the cat out of the bag. It exposed the fact that the big Chinese developmental projects of building roads, hospitals and housing schemes are all hiding corrupt deals between Shanghai and African leaders. The big question is: Who are the African leaders engaged in the crooked contracts with the Chinese? Obviously billions of dollars are involved in the deals, though roads are in the end built and other assignments are finally done.
From the Hillary visit has come out this shocking revelation of corruption organized between African countries and the newly established global economic giants such as China. This is the one type of corruption which journalists have to expose. It involves billions of dollars and is spread in almost every African country. Obviously Wangari Maathai has stepped on an extremely sensitive toe and she is likely to be met with formidable opposition from extremely powerful people. Journalists in Kenya should not let her fight that important battle single handedly.
Hillary’s theme throughout her most stimulating discussions was the question of Governance covered by the Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation principles on long term issues and solutions, commonly known as Agenda Four. She let the cat out of the bag when she said America believed there were some Kenyan leaders who were genuinely committed to reforms in the Constitutional, electoral, judicial and the police matters. The manner in which she came out openly defending Prime Minister Raila Odinga when a critic tried to ridicule him for rejecting American “lectures” on Governance , clearly proved that the leaders she had in mind were in ODM spearhead by Agwambo.
As the Secretary of State was entering the University campus she read a sign board saying “You are now entering a corruption free zone.” That gave her the words she used in her opening remarks at Open Dialogue when she told Kenyans to make sure the slogan expanded throughout the country. The challenge she was making was to the civil society and to the youth of Kenya who all were posing their questions to her in such a manner as to beg for financial assistance to help their various NGOs.
In the audience there were no conspicuous leaders of any trade union organizations and no religious leaders but the academicians and professionals at the University’s Taifa Hall paused such anti-government questions that clearly indicated they were thoroughly disgusted with the current leadership in Kenya. They were all asking for American assistance to engage in sensitization crusades to educate Kenyans about their political rights. Hillary had a few hints to the Kenyans. They could use the present vibrant Fourth Estate to make sure corruption among the leaders and other evils in society were regularly exposed. She virtually asked journalists and the civil society not to give up the struggle as that was the manner in which her own country was liberated to an extent of having a black man at the White House today.
Hillary Clinton had two very important examples that she gave to Kenyan journalists about what to write about. The first one was from Botswana, where the discovery of diamond had benefited all the people through visible progress in infrastructure and other developmental projects. And the second one was what was happening in the Democratic Republic of Congo, which is the complete opposite of what is happening in Botswana. In the Congo, which has one of the richest mineral resources in the world, people were still slaughtering one another for wealth. Nigeria, for example, still imported oil products when it was the world’s fifth producer of oil. All these were good stories which showed the importance of good governance in Africa.
Hillary found herself in a minefield when she was answering a question from a student of conflict resolution from the DRC who wanted to know what America was doing to stop multinationals from financing the war in Goma. Needless to say among the multinationals came from her own country. She had to admit those were the kind of exposes journalists were expected to do to draw the attention of the world about international crooks who help Africa under develop.
The discussion at Taifa Hall will most certainly change the political landscape in Kenya. It has helped young Kenyans realize that they have to do something to reject the current corrupt and obsolete political leadership in the country. Hillary’s hint was clear – something has to be done to establish truly democratic political parties in readiness for the next elections in 2012. After all it is through the formation of tribal political parties that Kenyan leaders have taken over power in the country. Kenya is extremely lucky to have a very large number of highly educated young men and women who are ready to play more realistic and meaningfully effective roles in the economic, social and political spheres in the country.
A young lady from Mombasa asked the Secretary of State an extremely sensitive question about marginalization of Muslim women in Kenya. It was a sensitive question because Kenyan Muslims do not want to be criticized no matter what evils thy do in the name of Islam. Hillary was so moved by the question from the Mombasa girl that she asked for particulars of the questioners, with a view of building bridges with her. At the end of the discussions it was very clear that the Secretary of State had hit the nail on its head. She had virtually mobilized young Kenyan to lawfully fight for their rights. The result of her visit to Kenya will become visible in 2012 when, hopefully, all the Agenda Four reforms will have been achieved.
Posted by I am a at 5:42 AM
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Hillary Clinton's Agenda Four shock
Hillary Clinton is in for a big shock. When she visits Kenya as President Obama’s Secretary of State she will discover that Kenyan leaders say one thing and then do the complete opposite. Armed with the Kenya National Dialogue and Reconciliation matrix of implementation agenda , the American politician will be eager to see what progress the country has made in implementing Agenda Four; and when she talks to various Kenyan leaders she will discover they have no plan whatsoever to practice what they preach.
Among the first promises broken by Kenyan leaders, concerns constitutional reforms. Mrs. Clinton will obviously be aware that Kenyans had promised to enact a Constitutional Review Statute that would have included a clear time table indicating when the country was to get a new Constitution. President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga will not be short of words when describing to Hillary that every effort was being made to achieve the goal of getting the country a new Constitution “as soon as possible.”
The two leaders will even tell the Americans the country already has a referendum law that will enable Kenyans to either reject or accept the Constitution the experts will draft. Raila and Kibaki will tell Hillary that Nzamba Kitonga is dealing with the matter of drafting the new Constitution but hey will not tell the good lady when Nzamba will finish his task. The good story that Hillary will hear about the new Constitution is that the new Minister for Justice , National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs, Mutula Kilonzo, is a no nonsense man.
Secondly the American leader will be interested in knowing what progress Kenya has made in reforming the Judiciary. Mrs. Clinton will know in advance that Kenyans had promised to make Constitutional changes to introduce a number of measures affecting the Judiciary including its financial independence. She will want to know what has been done to introduce transparency in the Judiciary which will include merit based appointment of judges.
The American Secretary of State will be shocked to know that nothing so far has been done to bring about any meaningful changes in the Judiciary. She will also be shocked to know that no disciplinary measures are being taken against the suspected corrupt judges who have yet to prove to be committed to human rights and gender equality. Mrs. Clinton will also be shocked to know that the country has done nothing to reconstitute the Judicial Service Commission to include other stake holders and enhance independence and autonomy of the Commission.
Mrs. Clinton’s biggest disappointment will be the story she hears about reforms in the Police Force. She will learn that nothing has been done to establish an independent Police Commission which was expected to review and define the role of the Administration Police. She will be dismayed to know that no review laws have been enacted in Kenya concerning security and policing to establish an independent complaints commission that will give citizens an oversight of police services. Such a law would make Kenya join the international league of modern democratic norms. Kenyan leaders will not have a satisfactory explanation for failing to recruit and train more police officers to raise the police-to-population ration to the UN standard. Though the timeframe for this recruitment and training is expected to be 2012, there is no evidence today that the exercise has started.
The other institution reform Mrs. Clinton will be concerned with will concern the Civil Service. Whatever Raila and Kibaki tell the Secretary of State, she is bound to discover that the Kenyan authorities have done nothing to review the Anti-Corruption and economic crimes Act of 2003. The two Kenyan leaders will have a hard time to convince the American politician that the Public Officers Ethics Act of 2003 is all that Kenya needs to fight corruption in the Civil Service. The Secretary of State will most likely discover that Kenya has done nothing to review the legal framework for the declaration of incomes, assets and liabilities with a view of establishing an efficient and devolved administrative, compliance and analysis institutional framework.
Kenyan leaders will explain to the Secretary of State that Kenya has already taken steps to facilitate parliamentary vetting of senior public appointments. They will give the examples of the manner in which members of the IIECK and the TJRC were appointed. But Kenyans will have no convincing argument to show Mrs. Clinton why no appropriate constitutional and legal reforms have been undertaken to facilitate similar parliamentary vetting for all other senior public appointments particularly permanent secretaries and ambassadors. Mrs. Clinton will be shocked to know that Raila and Kibaki have taken no steps whatsoever to bring about new legislations on whistleblowers protection or freedom of information and the operationalization of the Witness Protection Act of 2006.
The positive stories that Raila and Kibaki will tell Mrs. Linton will concern reforms in Parliament Standing Orders which have been reviewed to enrich quality and output of Parliamentary debate. Strengthening of multi-party democracy in Kenya, however, has not been achieved as political parties still belong to individual politicians though some MPs have shown signs of rebelling against their political parties. Though Kenyan leaders will proudly tell the former American First Lady that Kenyans enjoy live coverage of Parliament, they will have nothing to tell her about electronic voting in Parliament.
Though the Kenyan Parliamentarians have yet to succeed in enhancing oversight role of the Legislature over the national budget, impressive steps have been taken to strengthen organs of Parliament such as the Parliamentary Accounts Committee and the Parliamentary Investment Committee to promote transparency and accountability in the utilization of public resources. An important step that Parliament has yet to take and about which Mrs. Clinton is bound to ask, concerns steps to be taken to improve transparency of MPs by creating a register of interests and opening up Parliamentary Committee works to the public.
In view of the ongoing debate on Mau Forest, Mrs. Clinton is bound to ask what progress has been done on land reforms. She will be disappointed to know that nothing has been done to make any Constitutional review to address fundamental issues of land tenure and land use. She will also be shocked to learn that nothing has been done to develop and implement land policies that are intended to take into account the linkages between land use, environmental conservation, forestry and water resources. May be the biggest shock for the Secretary of State will be the discovery that nothing has been done about land ownership document replacement for owners affected by post election violence.
When Secretary Clinton asks Raila and Kibaki what has been done about the country’s poverty, inequality and regional imbalance she will be shocked to realize that nothing has been done to ensure equity and balance are attained in development across all regions including in job creation, improved income distribution and gender equality. The President and the Prime Minister will most certainly draw Mrs. Clinton’s attention to Uhuru Kenyatta’s budget which made a major attempt at achieving some form of devolution but there will be little that the two leaders can show Mrs. Clinton how they have implemented policies and programmes that minimize the differences in income opportunities in the arid and semi arid districts, urban informal settlements and pockets of poverty in high potential areas.
The Kenyan Government will not be able to show Mrs. Clinton what is being done to improve wealth creating opportunities for disadvantaged groups and regions through increased infrastructure spending in roads, water, sewerage, communication, electricity targeting poor communities and regions.
Another Agenda Four topic that will shock Secretary Clinton will be about unemployment, particularly among the youth. Raila and Kibaki will be quick to tell Mrs. Clinton about their “Kazi kwa Vijana” programme but they will not be able to prove to her that the programme generates an average of 740,000 new jobs each year from 2008 to 2012. Clinton will want to know how youth polytechnics have been revitalized and expanded in all districts to facilitate the training of young people in technical, vocational and entrepreneurial skills to equip them with relevant skills to participate fully in productive activities. Apart from failing to answer that question adequately the two Kenyan leaders will not be able to show the Secretary of State any youth empowerment centres which they have either rehabilitated or established in all constituencies.
About Consolidating national cohesion and unity, the two Kenyan leaders will have a lot tell Mrs. Clinton about the Ethnic and Race Relations Bill; but they will not be able to tell her anything being done by the Government to establish and operationalize a policy and institutional framework for a piece-building and conflict resolution programme (PBCR) and an early warning mechanism on social conflict including a PBCR monitoring and evaluation system and a restructured Secretariat, and enactment of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Bill.
Raila and Kibaki will have a hard time to convince Mrs. Clinton that something is being done in the country about transparency accountability and impunity. She will want to know what specifically is being done to strengthen the policy, legal and institutional framework for increased public transparency and accountability, anti-corruption, ethics and integrity, including through the development of national anti-corruption policy, enactment of necessary legislation, and systems and capacity enhancements to strengthen the National Audit Office. The two Kenyan leaders will have no satisfactory answer to that question.
Though her stay in Kenya will be so short and she will be busy doing vital AGOA assignments, Mrs. Hillary Clinton will be extremely disappointed with Kenyan leaders’ efforts to implement the now most demanding Agenda Four which the international community would like to see operationalized in Kenya. Yet Kenya’s future depends entirely on how that agenda is adopted and adapted.
Among the first promises broken by Kenyan leaders, concerns constitutional reforms. Mrs. Clinton will obviously be aware that Kenyans had promised to enact a Constitutional Review Statute that would have included a clear time table indicating when the country was to get a new Constitution. President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga will not be short of words when describing to Hillary that every effort was being made to achieve the goal of getting the country a new Constitution “as soon as possible.”
The two leaders will even tell the Americans the country already has a referendum law that will enable Kenyans to either reject or accept the Constitution the experts will draft. Raila and Kibaki will tell Hillary that Nzamba Kitonga is dealing with the matter of drafting the new Constitution but hey will not tell the good lady when Nzamba will finish his task. The good story that Hillary will hear about the new Constitution is that the new Minister for Justice , National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs, Mutula Kilonzo, is a no nonsense man.
Secondly the American leader will be interested in knowing what progress Kenya has made in reforming the Judiciary. Mrs. Clinton will know in advance that Kenyans had promised to make Constitutional changes to introduce a number of measures affecting the Judiciary including its financial independence. She will want to know what has been done to introduce transparency in the Judiciary which will include merit based appointment of judges.
The American Secretary of State will be shocked to know that nothing so far has been done to bring about any meaningful changes in the Judiciary. She will also be shocked to know that no disciplinary measures are being taken against the suspected corrupt judges who have yet to prove to be committed to human rights and gender equality. Mrs. Clinton will also be shocked to know that the country has done nothing to reconstitute the Judicial Service Commission to include other stake holders and enhance independence and autonomy of the Commission.
Mrs. Clinton’s biggest disappointment will be the story she hears about reforms in the Police Force. She will learn that nothing has been done to establish an independent Police Commission which was expected to review and define the role of the Administration Police. She will be dismayed to know that no review laws have been enacted in Kenya concerning security and policing to establish an independent complaints commission that will give citizens an oversight of police services. Such a law would make Kenya join the international league of modern democratic norms. Kenyan leaders will not have a satisfactory explanation for failing to recruit and train more police officers to raise the police-to-population ration to the UN standard. Though the timeframe for this recruitment and training is expected to be 2012, there is no evidence today that the exercise has started.
The other institution reform Mrs. Clinton will be concerned with will concern the Civil Service. Whatever Raila and Kibaki tell the Secretary of State, she is bound to discover that the Kenyan authorities have done nothing to review the Anti-Corruption and economic crimes Act of 2003. The two Kenyan leaders will have a hard time to convince the American politician that the Public Officers Ethics Act of 2003 is all that Kenya needs to fight corruption in the Civil Service. The Secretary of State will most likely discover that Kenya has done nothing to review the legal framework for the declaration of incomes, assets and liabilities with a view of establishing an efficient and devolved administrative, compliance and analysis institutional framework.
Kenyan leaders will explain to the Secretary of State that Kenya has already taken steps to facilitate parliamentary vetting of senior public appointments. They will give the examples of the manner in which members of the IIECK and the TJRC were appointed. But Kenyans will have no convincing argument to show Mrs. Clinton why no appropriate constitutional and legal reforms have been undertaken to facilitate similar parliamentary vetting for all other senior public appointments particularly permanent secretaries and ambassadors. Mrs. Clinton will be shocked to know that Raila and Kibaki have taken no steps whatsoever to bring about new legislations on whistleblowers protection or freedom of information and the operationalization of the Witness Protection Act of 2006.
The positive stories that Raila and Kibaki will tell Mrs. Linton will concern reforms in Parliament Standing Orders which have been reviewed to enrich quality and output of Parliamentary debate. Strengthening of multi-party democracy in Kenya, however, has not been achieved as political parties still belong to individual politicians though some MPs have shown signs of rebelling against their political parties. Though Kenyan leaders will proudly tell the former American First Lady that Kenyans enjoy live coverage of Parliament, they will have nothing to tell her about electronic voting in Parliament.
Though the Kenyan Parliamentarians have yet to succeed in enhancing oversight role of the Legislature over the national budget, impressive steps have been taken to strengthen organs of Parliament such as the Parliamentary Accounts Committee and the Parliamentary Investment Committee to promote transparency and accountability in the utilization of public resources. An important step that Parliament has yet to take and about which Mrs. Clinton is bound to ask, concerns steps to be taken to improve transparency of MPs by creating a register of interests and opening up Parliamentary Committee works to the public.
In view of the ongoing debate on Mau Forest, Mrs. Clinton is bound to ask what progress has been done on land reforms. She will be disappointed to know that nothing has been done to make any Constitutional review to address fundamental issues of land tenure and land use. She will also be shocked to learn that nothing has been done to develop and implement land policies that are intended to take into account the linkages between land use, environmental conservation, forestry and water resources. May be the biggest shock for the Secretary of State will be the discovery that nothing has been done about land ownership document replacement for owners affected by post election violence.
When Secretary Clinton asks Raila and Kibaki what has been done about the country’s poverty, inequality and regional imbalance she will be shocked to realize that nothing has been done to ensure equity and balance are attained in development across all regions including in job creation, improved income distribution and gender equality. The President and the Prime Minister will most certainly draw Mrs. Clinton’s attention to Uhuru Kenyatta’s budget which made a major attempt at achieving some form of devolution but there will be little that the two leaders can show Mrs. Clinton how they have implemented policies and programmes that minimize the differences in income opportunities in the arid and semi arid districts, urban informal settlements and pockets of poverty in high potential areas.
The Kenyan Government will not be able to show Mrs. Clinton what is being done to improve wealth creating opportunities for disadvantaged groups and regions through increased infrastructure spending in roads, water, sewerage, communication, electricity targeting poor communities and regions.
Another Agenda Four topic that will shock Secretary Clinton will be about unemployment, particularly among the youth. Raila and Kibaki will be quick to tell Mrs. Clinton about their “Kazi kwa Vijana” programme but they will not be able to prove to her that the programme generates an average of 740,000 new jobs each year from 2008 to 2012. Clinton will want to know how youth polytechnics have been revitalized and expanded in all districts to facilitate the training of young people in technical, vocational and entrepreneurial skills to equip them with relevant skills to participate fully in productive activities. Apart from failing to answer that question adequately the two Kenyan leaders will not be able to show the Secretary of State any youth empowerment centres which they have either rehabilitated or established in all constituencies.
About Consolidating national cohesion and unity, the two Kenyan leaders will have a lot tell Mrs. Clinton about the Ethnic and Race Relations Bill; but they will not be able to tell her anything being done by the Government to establish and operationalize a policy and institutional framework for a piece-building and conflict resolution programme (PBCR) and an early warning mechanism on social conflict including a PBCR monitoring and evaluation system and a restructured Secretariat, and enactment of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Bill.
Raila and Kibaki will have a hard time to convince Mrs. Clinton that something is being done in the country about transparency accountability and impunity. She will want to know what specifically is being done to strengthen the policy, legal and institutional framework for increased public transparency and accountability, anti-corruption, ethics and integrity, including through the development of national anti-corruption policy, enactment of necessary legislation, and systems and capacity enhancements to strengthen the National Audit Office. The two Kenyan leaders will have no satisfactory answer to that question.
Though her stay in Kenya will be so short and she will be busy doing vital AGOA assignments, Mrs. Hillary Clinton will be extremely disappointed with Kenyan leaders’ efforts to implement the now most demanding Agenda Four which the international community would like to see operationalized in Kenya. Yet Kenya’s future depends entirely on how that agenda is adopted and adapted.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
TJRC’s headache will be assassinations
The TJRC is in a tight corner. The country, led by the Cabinet, seems to have left all of its political problems to the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission. No justice will ever be done through Bethwel Kiplagat’s Commission unless the bitter truth is exposed. May be among the most unpalatable truths that Kiplagat will have a hard time trying to expose will be political assassinations that have taken place in the country since independence.
The real number of Kenyans who have lost their lives for political reasons will never be known. Neither will the reasons ever be exposed. One of the explanations for political assassinations not to be fully exposed is the fact that the murders were either committed by very powerful people in the Government or extremely influential people outside the Government. Some of the people concerned may be still alive and still in power. For that reason the country does not quite know the inside story of the assassinations of Tom Mboya, Pio Gama Pinto, JM Kariuki and Robert Ouko.
The big question is: Will Kiplagat’s team have the courage to expose the real planners and executors of these murders? Time alone will tell because the manner in which Kiplagat gets the answer to that vital question remains to be seen. It is that answer however that will determine whether or not the TJRC is worth respecting, trusting and spending money on.
Shot down on the then Government Road exactly 40 years ago on 5th July 1969, Thomas Joseph Mboya, was easily the most popular politician in Kenya. There was very little doubt that he would have easily stepped into Jomo Kenyatta’s shoes as the country’s second President following Kenyatta’s death, which was expected at any time, as the old man was not particularly healthy. Mboya's death, through an assassin’s bullet, stunned the country and automatically united all the Luos in Kenya who had previously been torn apart by the Tom Mboya-Oginga Odinga rivalry.
The man who was arrested and tried for Mboya’s murder, Nahashon Njenga Njoroge, was found guilty and hanged so fast that he had no time to tell the real story behind the killing. The abruptness in which all events concerning the murder, trial and the execution clearly indicated that the powers that be were trying to hide something. This was particularly the case when Nahashon Njenga told the people arresting him to “go for the big man”. During the trial no one really wanted to know who the “big man” was. Will Kiplagat’s team get to the truth and reveal “the big man” behind Tom Mboya’s death? Time alone will tell. Whether Kiplagat will have the courage to summon all the living “big men” of Kenyatta’s time, remains to be seen.
Another mysterious political assassination in Kenya is that of Pio Gama Pinto which took place in Parklands, Nairobi on 25th February 1965. The man arrested after the murder was Kisilu Mutua. A very quick trial, followed by an even quicker execution through hanging, took place at the speed of lightening. Nobody had ever heard of this man before, but he could have been hired by Pinto’s many enemies. As a real communist who understood the dogma’s theory and practice, he was an enemy of the British colonialists who had detained him on Manda Island during the state of emergency in Kenya.
If the British eliminated Pio Gama Pinto they must have done so to make sure communism would not spread in East Africa. Before his assassination, Pinto was very concerned with the brainwashing of the masses. He helped Jaramogi Oginga Odinga establish the Lumumba Institute which was only concerned with teaching Marxism to young Africans. The money to establish the institute came from Eastern European countries which made Jomo Kenyatta’s kitchen cabinet very disturbed.
Because Pio Gama Pinto was popular with all the other pro-Jaramogi members of Kanu he easily got himself nominated to both Parliament and the East African Legislative Council. As a founder of the party’s newspaper Sauti ya Kanu Pinto was very determined to spread Leftist theories and principles to the wananchi of Kenya. This must have disturbed Tom Mboya, James Gichuru and Jomo Kenyatta himself; but were they so angry with the Kenyan Goan as to get rid of him through an assassin’s bullet? Kiplagat’s team will have to tell us. Are there any living people who know the inside story of Pio Gama Pinto’s assassination? TJRC will have to find out. Will it succeed? Time alone will tell? Is there any hope of ever getting to know the truth about the death of Pio Gama Pinto? That remains to be seen.
Another political darling of the people murdered during Jomo Kenyatta’s regime was Josiah Mwangi Kariuki, known to everyone as JM Kariuki. He was mysteriously killed by unknown people and his body left on Ngong Hills for hyenas to feed on. A badly mutilated body was discovered on March 2nd 1975. Infuriated by the death, Parliament appointed a Commission to investigate on the real causes if the brutal act under the chairmanship of Elijah Mwangale.
Though the report named several senior police officers as the murderers of JM, not a single person has been taken to court to face charges of killing JM. The questions Kiplagat’s team has to try and get answers to are: Who were the cruel killers of JM and who sent them to do that dirty job? While trying to get those answers it is not difficult to imagine who would have liked to see the popular politician out of the way. First of all the man was extremely rich and no one knows where he got his money from. All that is known is that he was among Jomo Kenyatta’s first private secretaries when the old man was released from detention by the British just before the country’s independence.
The story goes that old Jomo sent JM to some East European countries to collect a “gift” for him. He passed through London on his way back home and opened a bank account in which he deposited for himself half of what he was given. How true is this story? Kiplagat’s team will have to find out. Will they succeed? Time alone will tell. Is there anybody who knows the truth about this story and is willing to expose everything? That remains to be seen.
Apart from that story, JM was a fearless Member of Parliament who specialized in exposing Jomo Kenyatta’s exploitation of the poor in Kenyans. He used to organize other members of parliament to oppose Jomo’s efforts to make himself the undisputed despot of Kenya. He once gathered scores of MPs at his Gilgil farm where they made the famous Ol-Kalau Declaration to oppose Jomo in Parliament. Did Jomo Kenyatta eliminate JM? Kiplagat’s team will have to find out. Will they succeed? Time alone will tell. Are there some people willing to tell the truth about that matter? That remains to be seen.
The other political assassination that will give a headache to the Kiplagat team is that of Robert Ouko whose mutilated body was found on 13th February 1990. There is a big difference between this murder and the other three. The assassination of Robert Ouko, who was Daniel arap Moi’s Foreign Minister, has been documented in many investigations including that of foreign experts. Books have been written implicating very important personalities in the Moi regime including Nicholas Biwott. This is the one investigation in which Kiplagat’s team should come out with a lot of truth. How it will handle that truth to bring about justice and reconciliation, however, remains to be seen.
The real number of Kenyans who have lost their lives for political reasons will never be known. Neither will the reasons ever be exposed. One of the explanations for political assassinations not to be fully exposed is the fact that the murders were either committed by very powerful people in the Government or extremely influential people outside the Government. Some of the people concerned may be still alive and still in power. For that reason the country does not quite know the inside story of the assassinations of Tom Mboya, Pio Gama Pinto, JM Kariuki and Robert Ouko.
The big question is: Will Kiplagat’s team have the courage to expose the real planners and executors of these murders? Time alone will tell because the manner in which Kiplagat gets the answer to that vital question remains to be seen. It is that answer however that will determine whether or not the TJRC is worth respecting, trusting and spending money on.
Shot down on the then Government Road exactly 40 years ago on 5th July 1969, Thomas Joseph Mboya, was easily the most popular politician in Kenya. There was very little doubt that he would have easily stepped into Jomo Kenyatta’s shoes as the country’s second President following Kenyatta’s death, which was expected at any time, as the old man was not particularly healthy. Mboya's death, through an assassin’s bullet, stunned the country and automatically united all the Luos in Kenya who had previously been torn apart by the Tom Mboya-Oginga Odinga rivalry.
The man who was arrested and tried for Mboya’s murder, Nahashon Njenga Njoroge, was found guilty and hanged so fast that he had no time to tell the real story behind the killing. The abruptness in which all events concerning the murder, trial and the execution clearly indicated that the powers that be were trying to hide something. This was particularly the case when Nahashon Njenga told the people arresting him to “go for the big man”. During the trial no one really wanted to know who the “big man” was. Will Kiplagat’s team get to the truth and reveal “the big man” behind Tom Mboya’s death? Time alone will tell. Whether Kiplagat will have the courage to summon all the living “big men” of Kenyatta’s time, remains to be seen.
Another mysterious political assassination in Kenya is that of Pio Gama Pinto which took place in Parklands, Nairobi on 25th February 1965. The man arrested after the murder was Kisilu Mutua. A very quick trial, followed by an even quicker execution through hanging, took place at the speed of lightening. Nobody had ever heard of this man before, but he could have been hired by Pinto’s many enemies. As a real communist who understood the dogma’s theory and practice, he was an enemy of the British colonialists who had detained him on Manda Island during the state of emergency in Kenya.
If the British eliminated Pio Gama Pinto they must have done so to make sure communism would not spread in East Africa. Before his assassination, Pinto was very concerned with the brainwashing of the masses. He helped Jaramogi Oginga Odinga establish the Lumumba Institute which was only concerned with teaching Marxism to young Africans. The money to establish the institute came from Eastern European countries which made Jomo Kenyatta’s kitchen cabinet very disturbed.
Because Pio Gama Pinto was popular with all the other pro-Jaramogi members of Kanu he easily got himself nominated to both Parliament and the East African Legislative Council. As a founder of the party’s newspaper Sauti ya Kanu Pinto was very determined to spread Leftist theories and principles to the wananchi of Kenya. This must have disturbed Tom Mboya, James Gichuru and Jomo Kenyatta himself; but were they so angry with the Kenyan Goan as to get rid of him through an assassin’s bullet? Kiplagat’s team will have to tell us. Are there any living people who know the inside story of Pio Gama Pinto’s assassination? TJRC will have to find out. Will it succeed? Time alone will tell? Is there any hope of ever getting to know the truth about the death of Pio Gama Pinto? That remains to be seen.
Another political darling of the people murdered during Jomo Kenyatta’s regime was Josiah Mwangi Kariuki, known to everyone as JM Kariuki. He was mysteriously killed by unknown people and his body left on Ngong Hills for hyenas to feed on. A badly mutilated body was discovered on March 2nd 1975. Infuriated by the death, Parliament appointed a Commission to investigate on the real causes if the brutal act under the chairmanship of Elijah Mwangale.
Though the report named several senior police officers as the murderers of JM, not a single person has been taken to court to face charges of killing JM. The questions Kiplagat’s team has to try and get answers to are: Who were the cruel killers of JM and who sent them to do that dirty job? While trying to get those answers it is not difficult to imagine who would have liked to see the popular politician out of the way. First of all the man was extremely rich and no one knows where he got his money from. All that is known is that he was among Jomo Kenyatta’s first private secretaries when the old man was released from detention by the British just before the country’s independence.
The story goes that old Jomo sent JM to some East European countries to collect a “gift” for him. He passed through London on his way back home and opened a bank account in which he deposited for himself half of what he was given. How true is this story? Kiplagat’s team will have to find out. Will they succeed? Time alone will tell. Is there anybody who knows the truth about this story and is willing to expose everything? That remains to be seen.
Apart from that story, JM was a fearless Member of Parliament who specialized in exposing Jomo Kenyatta’s exploitation of the poor in Kenyans. He used to organize other members of parliament to oppose Jomo’s efforts to make himself the undisputed despot of Kenya. He once gathered scores of MPs at his Gilgil farm where they made the famous Ol-Kalau Declaration to oppose Jomo in Parliament. Did Jomo Kenyatta eliminate JM? Kiplagat’s team will have to find out. Will they succeed? Time alone will tell. Are there some people willing to tell the truth about that matter? That remains to be seen.
The other political assassination that will give a headache to the Kiplagat team is that of Robert Ouko whose mutilated body was found on 13th February 1990. There is a big difference between this murder and the other three. The assassination of Robert Ouko, who was Daniel arap Moi’s Foreign Minister, has been documented in many investigations including that of foreign experts. Books have been written implicating very important personalities in the Moi regime including Nicholas Biwott. This is the one investigation in which Kiplagat’s team should come out with a lot of truth. How it will handle that truth to bring about justice and reconciliation, however, remains to be seen.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Politicizing Mau forest is suicidal
Daniel arap Moi’s sins are being felt by every Kenyan now. He it was who declared that a huge junk of land from the Mau forest would no longer be protected as water catchment. Instead he gave the land, free of charge, to his own son Gideon and his other very close Kalenjin friends Zakayo Cheruiyot, John Lokorio and Sammy Mwaita. The Kalenjins took the land and quickly sold it to land hungry Kenyans. The new buyers subdivided the land and sold it to yet other land hungry Kenyans, who cut down all the valuable trees.
As a result of this heinous act, started by Moi, the whole country is threatening to change into a hot barren land where not even a blade of grass would grow. Cows are dying, goats are dying, chickens are dying, men are dying, women are dying and children are dying; and when Kenyans complain, Kalenjin Members of Parliament led by William Ruto, protest that they are being ethnically ostracized . They are politicizing the Mau Forest, the lifeblood of Kenya , which Daniel arap Moi did not care if it vanished from the face of the earth, as long as his son and friends made money out of it, albeit illegally.
As the usual saviour of the country, Raila Odinga, the Prime Minister, let the cat out of the bag when he told Parliament, and indeed the rest of the country, that the man responsible for the current catastrophic weather condition is none other than the former President Daniel arap Moi. Being the shrewd politician he is he never even mentioned the old man’s name. All he did was to lay the names of the people allocated land at the priceless forest on the table and the man who did the allocation was automatically exposed. Before Raila laid the names on the table, William Ruto was breathing fire. He was on the warpath and did not want to hear anything about evicting the destroyers of Kenyan’s most valuable forest. According to him the settlers at the Mau forest had to be compensated heavily by the government before agreeing to be resettled anywhere else.
To the Kalenjins, Ruto became an instant hero. His popularity shot up so high, well above that of the former President Daniel arap Moi. His word became the law in the kalenjinland. He had acquired new powers and was threatening to use the powers to teach the Prime Minister a lesson. Ruto told Kalenjins to be ready to leave the ODM, which is seen as Raila Odinga’s party. Implicitly this was a clear message to Agwambo that in 2012 he will not get the Kalenjin support which gave him the sweeping victory of 2007. But Raila did not care. As far as he was concerned the truth and justice was more important than the Kalenjin threat. He told Parliament openly that he did not mind paying the political price for the stand he was taking and added: “I will not be intimidated. I have nothing to fear because I know what I am doing is in the best interest of this nation and I am speaking nothing but the truth.”
The truth of the matter is that the destruction of Mau Forest threatens the lives of millions of Kenya who depend on water flowing from the forests into no less than twelve rivers which include Nzoia River, Yala River, Nyando River, Sondu River, Mara River, Kerio River, Molo River, Ewaso Nyiro River, Njoro River, Nderit River, Makalia River benefiting Luos, Kikuyus, Maasais and Kalenjin themselves. Anyone trying to dry those rivers is playing with fire. Some of the rivers feed
William ole Ntimama is right; the eviction of the people living in the forest should not be delayed. It should have started yesterday and the country should be mobilized to start planting trees to replace the destroyed ones. All the youthful unemployed Kenyans should be mobilized into tree planting brigades. They should also be armed to fight whoever tries to stop them or to destroy the work they will be doing. The brigade should be led by Ongiek elders who have lived in the forest for years without destroying the ecosystem. The Government should not ignore the offer by Ongiek, who are the indigenous residents of the Mau forest, to show other Kenyans how to preserve the forest through the traditional methods.
Cabinet plan to mislead ICC failed
The Cabinet has failed yet again. It has not agreed on how to try post election violence planners and financiers. So it has embarked on a disinformation exercise meant to mislead both the International Criminal Court and the people of Kenya. This plan, however, is likely to fail as miserably as the Cabinet is despondently divided. The idea of addressing a Press Conference, attended by every member of the Cabinet at State House, to announce the options available to deal with crimes committed during post election violence, was a face saving damage controlling exercise, which is also bound to fail desolately. The cat is now out of the bag. Kenyans are not able to agree on how to establish a credible, internationally recognized tribunal, which will try post election criminals, who caused the death of over 1,000 citizens and displaced more than 300,000 innocent men, women and children.
The outcome of all this laughable political drama is that ICC’s Moreno-Ocampo will now have no option but to move in with full speed. It will not be surprising at all if he immediately makes the names in the Waki envelop public, and proceeds to indict the named people, no matter how important they are. After all the Kibaki-Raila Cabinet has now publicly disowned the Waki Report and opted to pretend to do something the respected judge never recommended – establishing special High Court Division to try the culprit.
That division will command neither local nor international respect. It will be composed of the same corrupt judges presently manning the Judiciary. The question Moreno-Ocampo and all Kenyans who would like to see justice done following the post election bloodbath is : If Chief Justice Johnson Evans Gicheru has been unable to control , introduce discipline , end corruption and expedite trials in the courts under him , how can he control the Special High Court Division, Mwai Kibaki was talking about?
The body language of Ministers standing with the President at the Press conference spoke volumes. They obviously had agreed to disagree. The three camps were still poles apart. Mutula Kilonzo’s sensible option to establish a credible tribunal that would have denied the President any form of immunity faced serious opposition from John Michuki, Kiraitu Murungi and Moses Wetangula. Though ODM, and therefore the Prime Minister, supported Mutula Kilonzo, who obviously was also supported by the Vice President, Kalonzo Musyoka, President’s loyalists won the day. Or did they?
They argued that Kenya should not be legally controlled by foreigners. The third group that was made to believe they were true victors of the Cabinet verbal contest was made up of the people whose names Moreno-Ocampo is after: Uhuru Kenyatta, William Ruto and Najib Balala. This group, strangely backed by William ole Ntimama wanted to hear nothing about The Hague and nothing about a credible local tribunal. They claimed the country needed to heal the post election violence wounds. With the unspoken threat of preparedness to embark on similar violence, if they were pushed against the wall, they forced everyone to reluctantly agree with their proposal – a combination of TJRC and a revamped Special High Court Division to try the suspect. Because some of the suspects sat on the same table as those who were genuinely interested in true justice, everyone had to pretend to agree. In other words they all agreed to disagree.
Mwai Kibaki talked of four other options examined by the Cabinet. First, there was the Mutula Kilonzo’s Special Tribunal which was obviously rejected by the suspects backed by the President’s sycophants. For obvious reasons the Cabinet rejected this option. Secondly there was the referral to the International Criminal Court (ICC) option under article 14 of the Rome Statute which is about referral of a situation by a State Party. Section One of that Article says that a State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purposes of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes.
Section Two of the Article says as far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. It is not difficult to imagine how Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto vehemently rejected this option backed by Najib Balala. They must have accused Mutula Kilonzo, Raila Odinga, James Orengo and Vice President, who suggested this alternative option, of trying to throw them into a lion’s den. What they forgot is that all the relevant documents have already been handed to the ICC Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo by Justice Waki. The Cabinet decision will not stop the ball rolling into a formidable force that will sweep Ruto, Kenyatta and Balala right into The Hague.
The third option Kibaki talked about was withdrawal from the Rome Statute under Article 127 which says under Subsection One that a State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary General of the United Nations, withdraw from the Statute. According to the Article the withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. Subsection Two of the same Article clearly says that a State shall not be discharged, by reason of withdrawal, from obligations arising from this Statute while it was a party of the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued.
It further states that the said State’s withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceeding in relation to which the withdrawing State has a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective. This means there is no way the culprits can escape Moreno-Ocampo’s net. Kibaki was also suggesting the repeal of the International Crimes Act of 2008, which cannot be done without the approval of Parliament. And Parliament seems to be determined to send the suspects to The Hague.
Kibaki’s fourth option was to try the suspect at the High Court under Section 8 of the International Crimes Act which says a person who is alleged to have committed an offence under of genocide, a war crime or crime against humanity, may be tried and punished in Kenya.The suspects in the Cabinet made sure this option was rejected because it still follows the ICC procedures. Looked at superficially, the option of establishing Special High Court Division may appear as a victory for Ruto, Kenyatta and Balala; but examining Kibaki-Raila Press Statement in details reveals that under Agwambo the Cabinet resolved it will not stand for impunity in the pursuit of justice, though it was also resolved that that the country should pursue national healing and reconciliation. The real and final winners were Raila and Kibaki who made the Cabinet publicly say that it reaffirmed its commitment to the rule of law, and in particular in its commitment to the International Criminal Court and will cooperate and fulfill its obligations to the Court. No wonder Uhuru and Ruto looked particularly gloomy at the Press Conference. The two know Moreno-Ocampo is on the way.
According to Kibaki and Raila the Cabinet will undertake accelerated far-reaching reforms in the Judiciary, Police and investigative arms of Government to enable them investigate, prosecute and try perpetrators of post election violence locally. This is the part that is deliberately confusing. It is obviously meant to calm Ruto and Kenyatta. Indirectly it is still opening the door for Moreno-Ocampo because everyone knows these crimes can neither be investigated nor prosecuted locally. This is the part of the Press Conference that is meant to mislead the ICC and keep them away for some time as tempers in Kenya cool down.
Police Commissioner Hussein Ali must also be shaking in his boots for Kibaki and Raila also said that the Cabinet will deal with other forms of impunity including extra-judicial killings , corruption and unlawful acquisition of public land and other assets. Obviously Raila and Kibaki know this suggestion will take a long time to implement and that is why they also proposed to amend the Truth Justice and Reconciliation Act to make TJRC more responsive and effective. If the amendment of this Act is meant to keep the ICC away, however, it will be rejected by Parliament with the contempt it deserves. The Cabinet’s confidence that with proper healing and reconciliation, Kenya will not face the events of last year’s post election violence will only come true if the perpetrators of the violence face international justice. This justice can only come through Moreno-Ocampo.
Posted by I am a at 4:21 AM
The outcome of all this laughable political drama is that ICC’s Moreno-Ocampo will now have no option but to move in with full speed. It will not be surprising at all if he immediately makes the names in the Waki envelop public, and proceeds to indict the named people, no matter how important they are. After all the Kibaki-Raila Cabinet has now publicly disowned the Waki Report and opted to pretend to do something the respected judge never recommended – establishing special High Court Division to try the culprit.
That division will command neither local nor international respect. It will be composed of the same corrupt judges presently manning the Judiciary. The question Moreno-Ocampo and all Kenyans who would like to see justice done following the post election bloodbath is : If Chief Justice Johnson Evans Gicheru has been unable to control , introduce discipline , end corruption and expedite trials in the courts under him , how can he control the Special High Court Division, Mwai Kibaki was talking about?
The body language of Ministers standing with the President at the Press conference spoke volumes. They obviously had agreed to disagree. The three camps were still poles apart. Mutula Kilonzo’s sensible option to establish a credible tribunal that would have denied the President any form of immunity faced serious opposition from John Michuki, Kiraitu Murungi and Moses Wetangula. Though ODM, and therefore the Prime Minister, supported Mutula Kilonzo, who obviously was also supported by the Vice President, Kalonzo Musyoka, President’s loyalists won the day. Or did they?
They argued that Kenya should not be legally controlled by foreigners. The third group that was made to believe they were true victors of the Cabinet verbal contest was made up of the people whose names Moreno-Ocampo is after: Uhuru Kenyatta, William Ruto and Najib Balala. This group, strangely backed by William ole Ntimama wanted to hear nothing about The Hague and nothing about a credible local tribunal. They claimed the country needed to heal the post election violence wounds. With the unspoken threat of preparedness to embark on similar violence, if they were pushed against the wall, they forced everyone to reluctantly agree with their proposal – a combination of TJRC and a revamped Special High Court Division to try the suspect. Because some of the suspects sat on the same table as those who were genuinely interested in true justice, everyone had to pretend to agree. In other words they all agreed to disagree.
Mwai Kibaki talked of four other options examined by the Cabinet. First, there was the Mutula Kilonzo’s Special Tribunal which was obviously rejected by the suspects backed by the President’s sycophants. For obvious reasons the Cabinet rejected this option. Secondly there was the referral to the International Criminal Court (ICC) option under article 14 of the Rome Statute which is about referral of a situation by a State Party. Section One of that Article says that a State Party may refer to the Prosecutor a situation in which one or more crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court appear to have been committed requesting the Prosecutor to investigate the situation for the purposes of determining whether one or more specific persons should be charged with the commission of such crimes.
Section Two of the Article says as far as possible, a referral shall specify the relevant circumstances and be accompanied by such supporting documentation as is available to the State referring the situation. It is not difficult to imagine how Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto vehemently rejected this option backed by Najib Balala. They must have accused Mutula Kilonzo, Raila Odinga, James Orengo and Vice President, who suggested this alternative option, of trying to throw them into a lion’s den. What they forgot is that all the relevant documents have already been handed to the ICC Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo by Justice Waki. The Cabinet decision will not stop the ball rolling into a formidable force that will sweep Ruto, Kenyatta and Balala right into The Hague.
The third option Kibaki talked about was withdrawal from the Rome Statute under Article 127 which says under Subsection One that a State Party may, by written notification addressed to the Secretary General of the United Nations, withdraw from the Statute. According to the Article the withdrawal shall take effect one year after the date of receipt of the notification, unless the notification specifies a later date. Subsection Two of the same Article clearly says that a State shall not be discharged, by reason of withdrawal, from obligations arising from this Statute while it was a party of the Statute, including any financial obligations which may have accrued.
It further states that the said State’s withdrawal shall not affect any cooperation with the Court in connection with criminal investigations and proceeding in relation to which the withdrawing State has a duty to cooperate and which were commenced prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective, nor shall it prejudice in any way the continued consideration of any matter which was already under consideration by the Court prior to the date on which the withdrawal became effective. This means there is no way the culprits can escape Moreno-Ocampo’s net. Kibaki was also suggesting the repeal of the International Crimes Act of 2008, which cannot be done without the approval of Parliament. And Parliament seems to be determined to send the suspects to The Hague.
Kibaki’s fourth option was to try the suspect at the High Court under Section 8 of the International Crimes Act which says a person who is alleged to have committed an offence under of genocide, a war crime or crime against humanity, may be tried and punished in Kenya.The suspects in the Cabinet made sure this option was rejected because it still follows the ICC procedures. Looked at superficially, the option of establishing Special High Court Division may appear as a victory for Ruto, Kenyatta and Balala; but examining Kibaki-Raila Press Statement in details reveals that under Agwambo the Cabinet resolved it will not stand for impunity in the pursuit of justice, though it was also resolved that that the country should pursue national healing and reconciliation. The real and final winners were Raila and Kibaki who made the Cabinet publicly say that it reaffirmed its commitment to the rule of law, and in particular in its commitment to the International Criminal Court and will cooperate and fulfill its obligations to the Court. No wonder Uhuru and Ruto looked particularly gloomy at the Press Conference. The two know Moreno-Ocampo is on the way.
According to Kibaki and Raila the Cabinet will undertake accelerated far-reaching reforms in the Judiciary, Police and investigative arms of Government to enable them investigate, prosecute and try perpetrators of post election violence locally. This is the part that is deliberately confusing. It is obviously meant to calm Ruto and Kenyatta. Indirectly it is still opening the door for Moreno-Ocampo because everyone knows these crimes can neither be investigated nor prosecuted locally. This is the part of the Press Conference that is meant to mislead the ICC and keep them away for some time as tempers in Kenya cool down.
Police Commissioner Hussein Ali must also be shaking in his boots for Kibaki and Raila also said that the Cabinet will deal with other forms of impunity including extra-judicial killings , corruption and unlawful acquisition of public land and other assets. Obviously Raila and Kibaki know this suggestion will take a long time to implement and that is why they also proposed to amend the Truth Justice and Reconciliation Act to make TJRC more responsive and effective. If the amendment of this Act is meant to keep the ICC away, however, it will be rejected by Parliament with the contempt it deserves. The Cabinet’s confidence that with proper healing and reconciliation, Kenya will not face the events of last year’s post election violence will only come true if the perpetrators of the violence face international justice. This justice can only come through Moreno-Ocampo.
Posted by I am a at 4:21 AM
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Kiplagat’s confession at TJRC necessary
Bethwel Kiplagat is a tainted man. He has a lot of rotten skeletons in his cupboard. But he is still the country’s best choice as the chairman of Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC). Before he embarks on his daunting task, however, he needs to step down for a very short period and let his able assistant, Betty Murungi, take the chair as he becomes the first witness before the Commission to make a serious and genuine confession about his relations with Daniel Toroitich arap Moi. That way the country will establish authentic confidence and trust in the diplomat’s endeavors to heal its deep social, political and economic wounds. The more open Kiplagat becomes in his confessions, the more acceptable as a healer he will be to all Kenyans.
According to Section 7(2) (g) of the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Act, Kiplagat will have powers, when he starts his job, to summon any serving or retired public officer to appear in person before his Commission to produce any document, thing or information that may be considered relevant to the function of the Commission. The country will eagerly wait to see whether the TJRC chairman will use that powers bestowed on him to summon former President Daniel arap Moi to explain to Kenyans how he became extremely wealthy when the majority of the people he ruled for well over 20 years don’t know where their next meal will come from. There is no way Kiplagat can avoid summoning Moi to also explain how he systematically violated Kenyans human rights. But before he does that, the TJRC boss must tell his own Commission publicly the role he played in assisting Moi in pulling down the country to its present low level of social, political and economic development.
Very important witnesses such as Koigi wa Wamwere and Njeru Kithangu who were jailed by Moi for political reasons have expressed misgivings about the authenticity and sincerity of Kiplagat’s TJRC because of his chairmanship. Koigi has said he will never appear before it because he has no confidence in it. Though Kiplagat will have powers to summon Koigi before his Commission, he should try to persuade the former detainee to give evidence willingly following his own confession. Kiplagat must tell his Commission what role he played in recommending to Moi, names of people to be detained. If he does not do so then he will have no moral authority to listen to Koigi’s sad story about how he was mistreated in jail by the former President.
Economically
In both Kenyatta and Moi regimes top public jobs were only given to people of the same ethnic groups as the two Presidents. Indeed the trend has changed very little even today in Mwai Kibaki’s Government. Kiplagat was a top civil servant and diplomat under Daniel arap Moi. He had powers to hire and fire. People would like to know what role he played in advancing Moi’s nepotistic system of hiring ambassadors, permanent secretaries, Provincial Commissioners and District Commissioners. If he avoids telling the truth about this sensitive issue then he will lose the confidence Kenyans have in him as the TJRC chairman. The only way of putting the record straight is by appearing before Betty Murungi and calling a spade a spade, no matter how uncomfortable it may be to him.
Apart from jailing their political opponents without any trials, Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi turned the Kenyan courts into instruments of political manipulations. Jails were full of political prisoners because there was no separation of powers between the Executive and the Judiciary. The independence of the Judiciary was destroyed by the two despots who had the sole powers to appoint, promote and demote judges and magistrates. What role did Kiplagat play, as one of Daniel arap Moi’s most trusted confidants, to assist him destroy justice in
Through the leadership of Jomo Kenyatta and Daniel arap Moi Kenyans were mentally enslaved and denied to read a number of what was then described as “prohibited publication”. A number of free thinking Kenyans were jailed by the use of Section 53 (1) of the Penal Code which states that any person, otherwise than in his capacity and in the course of his duties as a public officer, prints, makes, imports, publishes, sells, supplies, offers for sale or supply, distributes, produces or has in his possession or under his control any prohibited publication is guilty of an offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. What role did Kiplagat play in drafting such an obnoxious law? Kenyans want to know the truth which can only be possible through the evidence given by the diplomat to the TJRC.
Despite all the compelling evidence that requires Kiplagat to appear before the TJRC, he should not be removed from its chairmanship because the real reason for its existence is to give all Kenyans, including Kiplagat, an opportunity to tell the truth that will lead the nation to seek justice, truth and reconciliation. Showing Kiplagat the door will not achieve that purpose.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
