Post by miguna on Jan 21, 2006 22:32:51 GMT 3
DECLARATIONS BY KALONZO, RAILA AND RUTTO ARE GOOD FOR DEMOCRAY
By MIGUNA MIGUNA* - © 17 January 2006
Governments all over the world have an uncanny ability at always overthrowing themselves. They do this through a combination of factors including but not limited to miscalculations, fatal errors, misjudgments, inactions or plain incompetence. Even those governments that have fallen by the wayside through popular uprisings, revolts or coups d’e tat have largely had themselves to blame. Essentially, when a government fails to pay close and effective attention to important demands of its people – be it the failure to adequately address basic demands about food, water, housing or employment, or those concerning the respect for the people’s human rights such as the rights of association, speech, universal suffrage or equality – the result is usually an increased level of disaffection and discontentment from all sectors of the population and the risk of or an actual overthrow. In modern democracies, the overthrow routinely occurs through elections.
Since taking power in December 2002 amidst an unprecedented euphoria, President Kibaki has excelled only in the manufacture of uncountable reasons for the collapse or popular overthrow of his government, and for creating conditions that makes his re-election impossible. The reasons range from the abrogation of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the National Party of Kenya (NAK) and the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP); the entrenchment of grand corruption in and around government; actively deepening and expanding tribalism within government through successive appointments of individuals from the Mount Kenya region to plum positions; refusal to enact a popular constitution as well as a deliberate unpopular interference in the constitution review process; attempting to impose through deception and bribery an unpopular constitutional draft and losing the referendum on November 21st, 2005; failure to create jobs and to curtail the spiraling unemployment; inequitable allocation of public resources and concentrating infrastructural development in and around the Mount Kenya region; the refusal to reduce and eventually eliminate homelessness and abject poverty; and the complete refusal and failure to engage in genuine consultations, dialogue and negotiations with Kenyans regardless of their political affiliations, ethnicity or regional origins.
In view of the foregoing, the announcements by Kalonzo Musyoka, Raila Odinga and William Rutto that they are ready to participate in a fair and democratic electoral process within their respective political parties to identify whom amongst them is the most popular candidate for president before repeating the same selection process within the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) in order to identify one candidate to square off with anyone from Kibaki’s corner or any other outfit is very good news for democracy in Kenya. Although Musalia Mudavadi has not thrown his hat into the rings, he has spoken encouragingly of this process. That is very good news.
LDP’s recent announcement (as a party) that its presidential torchbearer will be selected fairly and democratically is a minty breeze of fresh air into an otherwise dangerously clogged and polluted political landscape that we call Kenyan politics. It is refreshing that all three leading figures within LDP have openly proclaimed their unwavering commitments to this process. Let us hope that they remain steadfast.
We also hope that Uhuru Kenyatta (and Kanu) will follow the example by the four presidential aspirants in openly supporting the fair, open and democratic selection of a single presidential candidate within the ODM. However, before that can happen, Uhuru needs to participate fairly within Kanu for the party’s torch. He must desist from underhanded attempts at wrestling the torch from others on the basis of his current position within the party. His position as chair is not and should not be equated with the presidential race.
Based on historical records available, the LDP declaration is a first in Kenya. There has never been an open, fair and democratic process of choosing key political leaders in this country. Former presidents, Kenyatta and Moi - and now Kibaki - were all secretly chosen by a shadowy group of political strongmen through unexplained processes. On each occasion, Kenyans were never really told either the criteria or method of selection. Neither were they informed of the qualities that distinguished the anointed leader from the rest of the population.
Regarding Kenyatta’s ascension into power, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga had simply insisted that there would be “no uhuru without Kenyatta” until Kenyans accepted his demands. Jaramogi was so relentless in his demand that even the British colonialists eventually gave in to it. However, Jaramogi was not just demanding Kenyatta’s release from prison; he was saying that Kenyatta must be the first leader of post-independence Kenya, based on the perception at the time that he symbolized national unity and represented the true aspirations of the entire Kenyan nation. Unfortunately, Jaramogi’s song of “no Uhuru without Kenyatta” took over and became the political platform for Kanu, which was then batting it out with Kadu for political dominance. A coherent explanation and detailing of a political program got lost and was swept by raw demands and national euphoria. Kenyatta never made a coherent policy statement before being handed over power. When Kenyatta emerged from colonial jail, he was handed the coveted office without a contest. That was a tragic political mistake that the country has not recovered from, and which should never have been repeated after Kenyatta’s death. It partly explains why Kenyatta later took Jaramogi and most Kenyans for granted during his entire fifteen year reign. Even more significantly, it may have laid the foundation for Kenyatta’s refusal to allow internal democratic elections within Kanu, leading to Jaramogi’s exit and the transformation of Kenya into a de facto one party state.
Moi assumed power by virtue of being Kenyatta’s deputy when the old man died in his sleep in Mombassa in August 1978. Even though the constitution allowed him ninety days to act as president before the country was to elect a new leader, a shadowy group of political buccaneers quickly took over and entrenched Moi into power without any party or national elections. Soon, the shadowy power barons went into high gear and transformed Kenya into a de jure one party state. There was no longer any need to worry about elections.
When Kibaki came to power in 2002, he had not been subjected to a thorough vetting by his own Democratic Party of Kenya (DP). There is no record of DP ever holding internal democratic part elections to choose Kibaki as its presidential candidate. In fact, there is no public record of DP having ever held internal elections. Even when he was announced to be the National Party of Kenya (NAK) presidential candidate, his choice had been secretly made by a few members of the NAK leadership, before the unorthodox merger with the LDP/Rainbow to form the National Alliance Rainbow Coalition (Narc). And within Narc, we have heard enough of the “Kibaki Tosha” declaration by Raila Odinga at Uhuru Park; a declaration that Agwambo now says he is sorry to have made. The rest, as they say, is now water under the bridge.
Each case represents a classical sophisticated political swindles; not that of democratic or popular exercises.
The public announcements by Kalonzo, Raila, Rutto and Mudavadi that they are prepared to “kill” their presidential ambitions for whoever emerges victorious through their respective party’s and ODM’s presidential selection processes was both good news and a significant message to Kenyans.
The most important message is that we have at long last got leaders who are prepared to practice what they preach. Historically, Kenyan politicians have excelled in populist political rhetoric but failed to demonstrate, through their actions, honesty, substance and selfless service to the nation. Almost all leading politicians in the past have never been keen to allow fair, free and open democratic party elections. Double speak and selfishness have been the preferred political lexicon of the ruling class.
Lack of competitive politics has tended to discourage fine young and visionary leaders from emerging. Invariably, the results of our political contests have been tilted in favour of the loud, rich and flashy pretenders. These political turncoats have always auctioned off democratic space. Power obtained and retained in this manner is inherently illegitimate.
Kenyans will expect the presidential candidates to focus on their programs and ideologies rather than – and less - on their personalities. They must explain to us how they will address the real and burning concerns of the Kenyan people. They must also explain how their party or parties will be different from the disappointing performance of the current regime. Only then will Kenyans be able to make informed decisions between them - vis-à-vis others who will undoubtedly throw in their hats into the ring as well.
______________________________________________________________________
*The writer is a Barrister & Solicitor in Toronto, Canada
By MIGUNA MIGUNA* - © 17 January 2006
Governments all over the world have an uncanny ability at always overthrowing themselves. They do this through a combination of factors including but not limited to miscalculations, fatal errors, misjudgments, inactions or plain incompetence. Even those governments that have fallen by the wayside through popular uprisings, revolts or coups d’e tat have largely had themselves to blame. Essentially, when a government fails to pay close and effective attention to important demands of its people – be it the failure to adequately address basic demands about food, water, housing or employment, or those concerning the respect for the people’s human rights such as the rights of association, speech, universal suffrage or equality – the result is usually an increased level of disaffection and discontentment from all sectors of the population and the risk of or an actual overthrow. In modern democracies, the overthrow routinely occurs through elections.
Since taking power in December 2002 amidst an unprecedented euphoria, President Kibaki has excelled only in the manufacture of uncountable reasons for the collapse or popular overthrow of his government, and for creating conditions that makes his re-election impossible. The reasons range from the abrogation of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the National Party of Kenya (NAK) and the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP); the entrenchment of grand corruption in and around government; actively deepening and expanding tribalism within government through successive appointments of individuals from the Mount Kenya region to plum positions; refusal to enact a popular constitution as well as a deliberate unpopular interference in the constitution review process; attempting to impose through deception and bribery an unpopular constitutional draft and losing the referendum on November 21st, 2005; failure to create jobs and to curtail the spiraling unemployment; inequitable allocation of public resources and concentrating infrastructural development in and around the Mount Kenya region; the refusal to reduce and eventually eliminate homelessness and abject poverty; and the complete refusal and failure to engage in genuine consultations, dialogue and negotiations with Kenyans regardless of their political affiliations, ethnicity or regional origins.
In view of the foregoing, the announcements by Kalonzo Musyoka, Raila Odinga and William Rutto that they are ready to participate in a fair and democratic electoral process within their respective political parties to identify whom amongst them is the most popular candidate for president before repeating the same selection process within the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) in order to identify one candidate to square off with anyone from Kibaki’s corner or any other outfit is very good news for democracy in Kenya. Although Musalia Mudavadi has not thrown his hat into the rings, he has spoken encouragingly of this process. That is very good news.
LDP’s recent announcement (as a party) that its presidential torchbearer will be selected fairly and democratically is a minty breeze of fresh air into an otherwise dangerously clogged and polluted political landscape that we call Kenyan politics. It is refreshing that all three leading figures within LDP have openly proclaimed their unwavering commitments to this process. Let us hope that they remain steadfast.
We also hope that Uhuru Kenyatta (and Kanu) will follow the example by the four presidential aspirants in openly supporting the fair, open and democratic selection of a single presidential candidate within the ODM. However, before that can happen, Uhuru needs to participate fairly within Kanu for the party’s torch. He must desist from underhanded attempts at wrestling the torch from others on the basis of his current position within the party. His position as chair is not and should not be equated with the presidential race.
Based on historical records available, the LDP declaration is a first in Kenya. There has never been an open, fair and democratic process of choosing key political leaders in this country. Former presidents, Kenyatta and Moi - and now Kibaki - were all secretly chosen by a shadowy group of political strongmen through unexplained processes. On each occasion, Kenyans were never really told either the criteria or method of selection. Neither were they informed of the qualities that distinguished the anointed leader from the rest of the population.
Regarding Kenyatta’s ascension into power, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga had simply insisted that there would be “no uhuru without Kenyatta” until Kenyans accepted his demands. Jaramogi was so relentless in his demand that even the British colonialists eventually gave in to it. However, Jaramogi was not just demanding Kenyatta’s release from prison; he was saying that Kenyatta must be the first leader of post-independence Kenya, based on the perception at the time that he symbolized national unity and represented the true aspirations of the entire Kenyan nation. Unfortunately, Jaramogi’s song of “no Uhuru without Kenyatta” took over and became the political platform for Kanu, which was then batting it out with Kadu for political dominance. A coherent explanation and detailing of a political program got lost and was swept by raw demands and national euphoria. Kenyatta never made a coherent policy statement before being handed over power. When Kenyatta emerged from colonial jail, he was handed the coveted office without a contest. That was a tragic political mistake that the country has not recovered from, and which should never have been repeated after Kenyatta’s death. It partly explains why Kenyatta later took Jaramogi and most Kenyans for granted during his entire fifteen year reign. Even more significantly, it may have laid the foundation for Kenyatta’s refusal to allow internal democratic elections within Kanu, leading to Jaramogi’s exit and the transformation of Kenya into a de facto one party state.
Moi assumed power by virtue of being Kenyatta’s deputy when the old man died in his sleep in Mombassa in August 1978. Even though the constitution allowed him ninety days to act as president before the country was to elect a new leader, a shadowy group of political buccaneers quickly took over and entrenched Moi into power without any party or national elections. Soon, the shadowy power barons went into high gear and transformed Kenya into a de jure one party state. There was no longer any need to worry about elections.
When Kibaki came to power in 2002, he had not been subjected to a thorough vetting by his own Democratic Party of Kenya (DP). There is no record of DP ever holding internal democratic part elections to choose Kibaki as its presidential candidate. In fact, there is no public record of DP having ever held internal elections. Even when he was announced to be the National Party of Kenya (NAK) presidential candidate, his choice had been secretly made by a few members of the NAK leadership, before the unorthodox merger with the LDP/Rainbow to form the National Alliance Rainbow Coalition (Narc). And within Narc, we have heard enough of the “Kibaki Tosha” declaration by Raila Odinga at Uhuru Park; a declaration that Agwambo now says he is sorry to have made. The rest, as they say, is now water under the bridge.
Each case represents a classical sophisticated political swindles; not that of democratic or popular exercises.
The public announcements by Kalonzo, Raila, Rutto and Mudavadi that they are prepared to “kill” their presidential ambitions for whoever emerges victorious through their respective party’s and ODM’s presidential selection processes was both good news and a significant message to Kenyans.
The most important message is that we have at long last got leaders who are prepared to practice what they preach. Historically, Kenyan politicians have excelled in populist political rhetoric but failed to demonstrate, through their actions, honesty, substance and selfless service to the nation. Almost all leading politicians in the past have never been keen to allow fair, free and open democratic party elections. Double speak and selfishness have been the preferred political lexicon of the ruling class.
Lack of competitive politics has tended to discourage fine young and visionary leaders from emerging. Invariably, the results of our political contests have been tilted in favour of the loud, rich and flashy pretenders. These political turncoats have always auctioned off democratic space. Power obtained and retained in this manner is inherently illegitimate.
Kenyans will expect the presidential candidates to focus on their programs and ideologies rather than – and less - on their personalities. They must explain to us how they will address the real and burning concerns of the Kenyan people. They must also explain how their party or parties will be different from the disappointing performance of the current regime. Only then will Kenyans be able to make informed decisions between them - vis-à-vis others who will undoubtedly throw in their hats into the ring as well.
______________________________________________________________________
*The writer is a Barrister & Solicitor in Toronto, Canada
