|
Post by miguna on Jan 30, 2006 4:43:48 GMT 3
Can ODM reconvene House on their own?
By Miguna Miguna
AN interesting debate is going on in Kenya concerning the Liberal Democratic Party’s (LDP’s) ultimatum to President Mwai Kibaki to either recall Parliament by latest February 14, 2006 or it will reconvene Parliament on its own accord. The reports also indicate that both the LDP and the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) has threatened to “storm” Parliament. According to the same reports, both LDP and ODM will place a register on the grounds of Parliament and collect signatures from Members of Parliament (MPs) that support their creative pro-active move.
LDP leaders have called on Kibaki to fire members of his Cabinet connected to the raging scams. Alternatively, they have asked him to resign or dissolve his government and Parliament in order to pave way for fresh elections.
The Kenyan press has quoted the Speaker of the National Assembly, Francis Ole Kaparo, Kabete MP, Paul Muite, Nominated MP and Kanu official, Mutula Kilonzo and Professor H. W. O. Okoth Ogendo, as stating that sections 58 and 59 of the Kenya Constitution give the president sole powers and discretion to summon, prorogue, dissolve and/or recall parliament.
On a strict technical basis alone, the position expressed by these eminent sons of Kenya is correct.
Section 58 (1) of the Constitution provides that “Subject to this section, each session of Parliament shall be held at such place within Kenya and shall commence at such time as the President may appoint.”
Whereas section 59(1) gives the president power to prorogue Parliament, subsection 2 gives him power to dissolve Parliament at any time.
On the surface, these two provisions appear to bestow upon the president unfettered powers of calling into session, suspending, proroguing or recalling Parliament solely on his individual and idiosyncratic whims. Forget all those post-modernist theoretical niceties about representative democracy. Going by these sections alone, Kenya is an Imperial State!
The problem is that we are living in the twenty first century.
If Kenya was a feudal state or monarchy under a Mwai Kibaki Lordship or Monarch - and we were frozen in a 15th century time warp - one could fully understand why an otherwise celebrated array of eminent lawyers would present the above arguments in support of Kibaki’s unique and undemocratic exercise of his executive fiats.
But we are neither a feudal state nor a monarchy. And despite his pretensions and illusions - Kibaki is neither an actual Feudal Lord nor Monarch. Kenyans are not slaves living under servitude in the 15th century.
Kenyans are freedom loving. They are committed to positive changes in all aspects of their lives. They are also proud members of the twenty first century. No amount of delusions, manipulations or sophistry will return us to the Stone Age or the existence under a one party dictatorship where the Big or Strong Man ubiquitously decides everything without our input.
Kenyans are aware that they are the ones that gave Kibaki power - and all the pretenders to the throne - in December 2002. The same way they gave Kibaki power is exactly the same way they can recall, reclaim or withdraw that power. Power ultimately belongs to the people.
While very interesting intellectually, the legal debates and arguments over this issue are misplaced. This is squarely a political issue whose final determination will occur in the political realm or arena - not in a court of law. The arguments, therefore, must be framed in political terms. Law, after all, is only a set of rules established by authority (mostly through political processes and instruments).
The Constitution ought to have been designed and intended to serve and protect the people of Kenya; not their leaders. The people of Kenya are not and cannot be slaves of constitutional provisions that were inserted in the Constitution as instruments of oppression. Their proper purpose should have been to empower the people; not disenfranchise them.
Law does not exist in a political vacuum.
That is why the analysis and debate on whether or not the LDP or any other democratically minded Kenyans can recall or “storm” Parliament, must take a wider global scope than restrict itself to a narrow legalistic one. It is this prevalence of and refuge in narrow legalistic interpretations of the Constitution that demonstrate the urgent need for the people of Kenya to rewrite a new empowering Constitution in which the sovereign powers of the people shall be forever unambiguously enshrined.
Kenyans may learn a few lessons from the recent Ukrainian experience. In early 2005, Victor Yushchenko was sworn in as President of Ukraine, having roundly defeated his main opponent after a rerun of the presidential elections. To get the rerun, Mr Yushchenko’s supporters had to take to the streets for 100 days in chilly winter weather; stormed Parliament and forced a debate on the electoral “fraud” that had occurred in November 2004; and only after 100 days of dramatic street protests dubbed the “Orange Revolution”, was the rerun allowed.
Mr Yushchenko did not get a rerun of the presidential elections by adopting a pacifist, turn the other cheek strategy. He did not win by waiting for the incumbent executive to make decisions in his favour. Neither did he do it by a technical narrow interpretation of the Ukrainian Constitution.
Victor Yushchenko managed to overturn his purported defeat and transformed it into victory by doing the following:
By organising the ordinary people to demonstrate in a disciplined manner their disgust, opposition and disapproval of the electoral fraud. This was civil disobedience at its best.
By the people remaining committed, focused and steadfast against government’s proclivity to violence, repression and denials.
By astutely using the local and international media to popularize the cause of the Orange Revolution and demonise the retrogressive forces of the government in power.
And by cleverly using both the courts and Parliament in overturning the results of what had been seen as rigged elections.
Members of Parliament are the people’s representatives. They were sent to Parliament to act as the ears and eyes of the people. They have both moral and legal rights and authority to call the government to account on our behalf. And if or when the government refuses to act accountably, as it has been doing, it is the duty of all MPs to do whatever is within their powers and abilities to either force the government to act or to remove it from power. The mere fact that Kibaki suspended Parliament does not extinguish the powers, authority or moral duties of our MPs. Ultimately, it is the people of Kenya who are the primary stake holders in this government. If the people are supportive of the course of action announced by both the LDP and ODM, no amount of force, robotic recitations of constitutional provisions or blind obedience to the imperial presidency will or can stop them.
Let me end by reminding readers of the recent remarks of the former Ghanaian President Jerry Rawlings in a speech read at Witwatersrand University in South Africa:
“Whilst we are rid of the Bokassas, the Mobutu Sese Sekos, the Idi Amins and their gross corruption propped up by the West during the Cold War era, and whilst many newer generation of African leaders believe in service to the people rather than personal gain, there is still an insidious smell of corruption at many levels. Nobody can solve these problems for us. It is the responsibility of Africans to hold their leaders to account, and the responsibility of African governments to demonstrate that their hands are clean.”
This is an apt reminder for Kenyans on why they have to remain steadfast in the face of Kibaki’s refusal to stamp out corruption, account for himself or for his government and prove to us that the government’s hands are clean.
We challenge our MPs to congregate without delay at the people’s Parliament or around it and either vote for the removal of this inept government or join or lead the Kenyan masses in demanding the same. The LDP/ODM must lead this onslaught now or it risks losing its relevance. Only then will those MPs prepared to join the trenches be able to redeem themselves.
—The writer is a Barrister & Solicitor in Toronto, Canada
|
|
|
Post by abdulmote on Jan 30, 2006 10:44:43 GMT 3
miguna, now you are talking! ODM has to wake UP! You know what, this is why I always maintain that these guys are not serious. But some one had to do it, be it Uhuru out of all!
Anyway, fingers crossed, although personally speaking, I would have given him a week at the most! Or even less!
|
|
|
Post by aeichener on Jan 30, 2006 11:38:45 GMT 3
Miguna in his article is unaware of the one and outstanding historical parallel, which also spotlights the present situation aptly:
le serment du jeu de paume.
Alexander
|
|
|
Post by roughrider on Jan 30, 2006 19:04:21 GMT 3
Miguna,
May I suggest a simple but effective strategy?
All MP's who are disgusted by corruption should sign the petition and promptly avail themselves on Valentines Day for the official opening of the people’s parliament. The speaker may come and if he does not those present must elect a speaker from amongst themselves.
They should then discuss the FOUR BIG issues of the day; Grand state-sanctioned corruption, the famine situation, the recent disaster on Ronald Ngala Street and our disaster preparedness and final the quest for a new constitution.
The inescapable conclusion will be that the government has failed the people and is actually feeding them on a lethal brand of governance. They will after deliberations realize that the moment of truth has come. Decisive and resolute action must be taken. The government cannot and should not be allowed to govern. The country must be made ungovernable. All over 100 members of parliament who will be present must then, simultaneously hand in their RESIGNATIONS in writing to the speaker.
They should then annopunce a programme of patriotic bipartisan nationwide protests involving civil society to force the government out. They should declare that no elections will be allowed in the vacant seats if they are NOT national general elections….the country will be made ungovernable.
You can pick it up from there……
|
|
|
Post by ndauosa on Jan 30, 2006 19:14:44 GMT 3
That's the most effective solution to the silent hands off strategy employed by kkk...Kibaki. That way we are guatanteed of a general elections. Save for our parliamentarians who have loans to service and are not sure of making it back. ;D
|
|
|
Post by adongo12345 on Jan 30, 2006 21:11:59 GMT 3
Miguna and other Comrades
This move by ODM and LDP is a big deal. I was nervous about it right from the day Raila speaking as an LDP leader indicated they were giving Kibaki 14 Days to open parliament or they will do it themselves.
My fear was based on what I call the Matiba syndrome which I think is the worst form of political impotence. Matiba had this very irritating habit of making outrageous threats against Moi which everybody knew he would never carry out and eventually made him a laughing stock of sorts. Every now and then when things were rough in the land Matiba would give Moi a week or so to resign or he(Matiba) and his supporters would storm State House. Of course the week would come and go and not a word would be heard from Matiba. Over time nobody even bothered to listen to Matiba's chain of empty threats.
So when I heard LDP and ODM will open parliament which I know by law can only be reopened by the President, I was like Good lord, I hope these guys are serious because if they are not it would be a huge political blunder. The cardinal law in politics is never to make a threat you cannot carry out. It is the same for those practicing law, I am sure someone like Miguna knows this. Lawyers will never ask a question during cross examination to either party if they do not already know the answer.
Anyway I like the approach Miguna has taken here and I am also encouraged that the ODM leaders saw the need to speak with a united voice instead of Raila saying his thing here and Uhuru Kenyatta organising his own thing there.
The only way this thing works is to organize it into a multi-purpose people's action against Kibaki's corruption, lies and inaction.
The opposition re-opening of parliament has to be mass action based, meaning it has to be with a combination of other activities in the city and around parliament where the Kenyan public will be involved. ODM should already book alternative venues like Uhuru Park or even Nyayo Stadium for a mass rally on the same day and start mobilizing Kenyans from across the country to come to the city and tell the Kibaki government they are fed up with the corruption of Kibaki and his associates, with hunger and starvation and with the stalling of the constitutional process.
If the politicians go there by themselves trying to open parliament they are going to be embarrassed and thrown out by the police and then the crooks and the Muites will have a field day quoting a hundred sections of the law which prohibits their action.
Also Kenyans are often very nervous about terms like "Storming" Parliament. It connotes a violent illegal act even though we know it is a simple political action. These are the kinds of things that give easy ammunition to the cornered Kibaki regime to demonize the ODM as a group desperate to grab power. The good news for ODM is that Kenyans probably wouldn't mind a change of guard right now and unlike disgraced sycophants like Koigi most Kenyans know we cannot isolate the fight against corruption from the fight for political power in the land. After all Kibaki is using his powers as head of state to facilitate the robbery and one of the primary objectives of this sordid affair is to finance the DP stranglehold on political power in the country. So the fight against corruption is inevitably linked to the struggle for political power in the country. I am not going to go into the Goldenberg part of this power equation right now.
Also we have to be fully aware that there is going a desperado full court press by the Kibakites to scuttle the ODM move. They are going to trash it and even use the cops and the "law" to scare these people off. Given the government's success in intimidating the ODM into abandoning their plan to hold provincial rallies after the banana referendum failure, the government is aware these guys are not that solid when it comes to mass action. Most of the ODM leaders have never been involved in any serious mass action and regrettably the "civil society" groups who are good at this are literally paralyzed. Also some chicken elements within the ODM leadership are going to oppose mass action of any significant magnitude. Some of them already think they are the "government in waiting" and should look stately, not be seen on the back of police trucks heading to Central Police Station. So we are still talking a long shot here.
But I agree with Miguna that a well organized mass action coupled with a "People's Parliament" debating the issues so dear to Kenyans at a time when Kibaki is comatose and hiding from the people would be a powerful move to take this battle to the people of Kenya who ultimately are the ones who are going to solve it.
If they successfully make that move the ODM would automatically take the leadership on the pressing issues of the day and let Kibaki be forced to be the one responding to ODM moves. That is how you make progress in politics when you are in opposition, particularly to such a weak and despised bunch of cons.
Adongo
|
|
|
Post by miguna on Jan 30, 2006 21:16:03 GMT 3
Roughrider,
I agree entirely, but for one. The resignation bit will play into their hands. MPs are more forceful and will attract support (both locally and internationally) as long as they remain MPs. However, as soon as they resign, Kibaki will find a golden opportunity to do what Kenyatta did to KPU. So, I accept all the other suggestions but for this bit. I think it would be quite something to see more than 100 MPs demonstrating with Wananchi in Kenya. This limping and wounded animal will not last for a week - I can see that. Very good suggestions. Since you are on the ground (I think), maybe you should make sure these ideas "inflitrate" the LDP/ODM agenda for the next coming 30 days (if the fool lasts that long, which he just might)...
[unedited] -Miguna-
|
|
|
Post by abdulmote on Jan 30, 2006 22:03:03 GMT 3
Think of the following very carefully:-
Sovereignty of a state is made of the people. Sovereignty belongs to the people. The people have their representatives in the form of MPs, who are responsible and have the mandate of deliberating and legislating on behalf of the people.
There is no other body, in any other form whatsoever which is superior to the people. Sovereignty is supreme and so are the people. Everything else, and including the Constitution is subordinate to the people. The Constitution is nothing but a guide on which the people's aspirations are expressed as desired by the people. The Constitution and any other office enacted by the same are naturally subordinate to the people. The people are supreme!
And so it follows that to deny, obstruct or hinder the people's wishes and desires is in itself unlawfull and illigal. To obstruct the only instrument of the peoples' voice is in itself an act which is illigal! To close the Parliament, be it as sanctioned by the Constitution, indeed and for the purpose of either oppressing them, or obstructing their clearly expressed desires and wishes through their willfully elected Representatives is in itself a breach of the very law we are trying to enforce!
And so it follows that if a people's elected person, of whatever the status in office, be it such as the President's, is prepared to obstruct and oppress the very people who elected him in the first place, through the very laws that are subject to the people, that person is certainly in breach of the fundamental and natural laws of the land, and so he should rightfully be impeached as a traitor of the highest order and deserving the harshest of sentences the peole can ever imagine and impose as the law!
|
|
|
Post by Daktari wa makazi on Jan 30, 2006 23:27:26 GMT 3
Miguna's view are welcomed. But, I read with disgust and annoyance the justifications that Parliament cannot meet unless called by Kibaki. Kenyans have woken to the massive looting of their national purse, and the Law did nothing to stop it. To be precise, the operations of the Law proved inefficient hence the looting we read in the press. The truth therefore is that the Law has failed to stop and curtail corruption. The same Law cannot be used to excuse inaction and dissuade mass action. If the Law had failed, and by any yardstick it has, then the real battle was surely about to begin: Kenyans must put themselves in the way of the corrupt. Let us face it the modern direct activism is a serious political movement. No one, however, professes to be less impressed by the direct action campaigns than the members of parliament. Many members actively engaged in these new politics. Discussing the movement with apologist of the MKM, I have found that no topic is quicker to excite their hostility. On first sight this seems strange, especially from members who claim to pursue social justice, and who could never have stood, let alone been elected, were it not for the fruits of civil disobedience in the past. But perhaps we should not be too surprised: to acknowledge the validity of the protest movement is to concede that parliament may not be the only valid forum for national political debate.
The talk of direct action movement is giving rise to a new and thrilling politics of empowerment in our country. However, I counsel the guiding light should be no crime to be been committed, and no danger to the public apparent. As Adongo says above words like storming generate a violent meaning.
Corruption has succeeded in uniting all the disparate factions whose interests or activities it threatened. Direct action will draw huge crowds. I agree activists must squatted the Parliament and put the government on trial. Perhaps most significant is the sudden emergence of largely local direct action campaigns, often involving people from different tribes. No description of this movement is less accurate than the one most frequently used: single issue politics, fighting the corrupt governemnt of Kibaki.
Just as the virtues and failings of trade unionism are those of age, the new direct action movements are those of youth. It is bumptious, forceful, chaotic and creative. Like increasing numbers of young people, many of the protesters feel that mainstream politics has left them in the cold. They see the concerns of the ruling elites as wholly apart from their own, and believe that none of the political parties either understands or cares for the fate of those who have been gradually excluded from work, representation and physical space. Young people and politics mix well, but in Kenya they have tended to keep away from each other. Bafflement and cynicism have kept them away from politics. But the direct activists, working things out for themselves, seem slowly to be leading themselves out of the wilderness of disenfranchisement. They are starting by attempting to kick the corrupt rule of Kibaki to the ground. Their self-education has spawned a multitude of monsters. Conspiracy theories crackle around the youth meeting joints. But out of their wishful thinking, credulity and indiscipline is emerging not, as one might have expected, an acute form of the moral relativism infecting so many young people in Kenya, but a system of thought which, as it sheds its excesses, is gradually accreting into a new and workable politics – direct actions. Long live the spirit, long live the fight.
|
|
|
Post by job on Jan 31, 2006 0:22:07 GMT 3
Folks, Great ideas,...........I'll say a word about them below.
There's this irritant toad-eyed, lawyer-by-correspondence,,....... who hangs on the coats of all monied looters ( both Goldenberg & Anglo-Leasing),.......Pattni, Murungaru, etc etc..........I'll not even bother to state his name,......this Kibaki neo-sycophant always thinks he scares anyone with threats of Treason while trying to catch the formers attention.
Peaceful Public demonstrations or meetings are part of our constitutionally granted freedoms, whether its Raia or MPs,.....or have our freedoms of association been taken back by the Emperor?
Back to the Great suggestions here! I hope this a united ODM challenge & not a 1/2 hearted KANU & LDP joint venture? .....Are both Uhuru & Ruto jointly in this or not? We need to know upfront which wimps don't want to be part of this third liberation showdown before we mix up roles.
Are guys mobilizing only to force the prosecution of Anglo Leasing looters,......forgetting about the Katiba & other items on roughriders, Miguna's, Abdulmotes, & Adongo's agenda ,..........or is this essentially going to be a start of the major battle encompassing the total Cause of the third liberation altogether?
This involves a lot of time, planning, coordination, finances, and public sensitization.
The agenda should be simple; Peaceful demonstrations, rallies, & protests conducted across the whole nation, calling for; the resignation of Kibaki's government, the prosecution of all Corrupt looters, calling of fresh polls, among other things..............the people must state their collective will firmly.
It must be a multi- pronged approach comprising among others; the peoples/mass front, the parliamentarians/political front, the Civil society & of course,...... the allied-Religious groups.
People must be involved both locally, & internationally (bilateral & multilateral donors, & international press)
A calendar detailing specific dates and time lines with delegated roles for the various stake-groups should be made now.
The ODM should start a series of consultations and meetings with such stake-holders,....way before the deadline for role assignments & delegations.
Credible groups within the Civil society must be delegated specific duties,.......(well coordinated independent roles or roles assigned in collaboration or collectively as a sole national entity where applicable) preferably, targetting the international target groups (donors & international press).
Key must be how to SUSTAIN the pressure. IT MUST NOT BE A ONE DAY Feb 14th, EVENT which the government can easily avert using the brutality & instruments of power they wield. It must be an on-going process,......not only centred in Nairobi fellows. Select locations say Busia, Mombasa, Machakos, Kisumu, Garissa, Thika, Eldoret,......must be part of this.
As a matter of fact, the people themselves should do it or force the ODM to release a timetable now. This is a peoples cause. The public in various towns, cities must be called upon , on select days, starting Feb 14th,...and sustained intermitently or continuously in a well synchronized fashion.
It is good to organize a parallel rally for the people on the same day, Feb 14th,.... at a well publicized venue,......(which the government may predictably want to BAN in reflex-jerk fashion),.......that's still good enough,.......such publicity & glare by the world is important........that's part of the process of pressurizing the government while publicizing and sensitizing public awareness to the problem.
Concurrently MPs must go or attempt to go to convene Parliament for their "baraza". The Press must cover all the associated outcomes/progress,..etc for the full glare of local and global/international citizens.
The big question is this,....does ODM have the will and capacity to do just that, as an organizational challenge notwithstanding the roadblocks anticipated? Time will tell, from my vantage point in the diaspora, at this time, I can only wish all Kenyans the best.
unedited.
Job
|
|
|
Post by maina on Jan 31, 2006 0:37:40 GMT 3
Wananchi, I am surpassingly thrilled by your moxie prose and enslavement of the belief to see an end (once and for all) to President Kibaki’s incumbency. That is a charmer and exciter to me particularly, being a self-respecting and satisfied sprout and progeny of the Mount Kenya stock, and at a time when one of our very own is d**nable for the apparent political retrogression, economic slump, and social debasement in our winning country. Sequentially, his (President Kibaki’s) polity has progressively spark-plugged and enterprisingly pullulated favoritism and discrimination of all types, which has mustered up invidiousness and coldness towards the Agikuyu! In consequence also is the resulting omnipresent national clangorous uproariousness.
That aside, I lavishly disagree with your brazen attempts to disesteem and tune out the rule of law, yes, the deep-seated and statutory specifications as coded in the Kenyan Constitution.
Firstly Miguna, and with all due respect, as a conspicuous and noteworthy lawyer and officer of your judicial system(s), you should not be corroborating, favoring, or even ratifying any mass action/demonstration (whether peaceful or violent) when it clearly works against the constitution. I imagine a lawyerly role in this affair being pertinaciously advisory or consultative but not proscribing peace while concomitantly affirming and acknowledging mass actions that are contrary to the rule of law.
Mind you, I have no problem with anyone peacefully demonstrating, nor do I have any grouses with you calling for demonstration(s) – freedom of expression is explicated in the Constitution. My squabble is that these demonstrations will be carried out in such a way as to heedfully flaunt the rule of law and the constitution as if to audaciously laugh it off. You see doing just that is akin to applauding, advocating and validating mob rule and nongovernement. In other words, it is solely approbating nihilism! The Speaker has proclaimed vociferously that storming into parliament to conduct business while parliament is in prorogation is ILLEGAL!
Secondly, as a politican-cum-lawyer-cum-politician (as depicted and described right here in Jukwaa and elsewhere), you have profound knowledge and experience in opposition politics. As such, you should be the last one to speak against the rule of law. It makes one look compromised and appears as if he/she is recklessly negligent to his/her cause.
Thirdly, on the basis of the write ups here, why does everyone seem to have somewhat somehow slipped up in acceding and confirming that the law in Kenya was written in the why for and what for of a democratic state way back in Lancaster, England? In other words, the law was written for peace-loving, peace-abiding citizenry irrespective of tribes, cultural beliefs, et cetera. It was to be truthfully and meticulously followed and recognized by every one everywhere (including foreigners). No one should presume to be above it – that is why parliaments and the justice systems exist!
Fourthly and unspeakably, nobody anywhere should ever draw comparisons between Ukraine, yes, a country with a mammoth communist political history and dispensation, and the democratic Republic of Kenya, pointedly to the signification of mass action(s). The impact of mass action(s) in both countries is exaggeratedly dissimilar.
Ukraine for instance has ten (10) sub-groups (Ukrainians, Russians, Belarusians, Moldovans, Hungarians, Bulgarians, Jews, Poles and the Crimean Tatars) that all speak the Ukrainian and Russian languages. Everybody speaks and writes both of these languages.
The Ukrainian national idea persevered during the twenties, but with Stalin’s rise to power and the campaign for collectivization, the Soviet leadership imposed a campaign of terror that ravaged the intellectual class. Stalin also created an artificial famine (called the Holodomor in Ukrainian) as part of his forced collectivization policies, which killed millions of previously independent peasants and others throughout the country. Estimates of deaths from the 1932-33 famine alone range from 3 million to 7 million.
When the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, some Ukrainians, particularly in the west, welcomed what they saw as liberation from Communist rule, but this did not last as they quickly came to understand the nature of Nazi rule. Nazi brutality was directed principally against Ukraine's Jews (of whom an estimated 1 million were killed), but also against many other Ukrainians. Babyn Yar in Kiev was the site of one of the most horrific Nazi massacres of Ukrainian Jews, ethnic Ukrainians, and many others. Kiev and other parts of the country were heavily damaged.
After the Nazi and Soviet invasions of Poland in 1939, the western Ukrainian regions were incorporated into the Soviet Union. Armed resistance against Soviet authority continued as late as the 1950s. During periods of relative liberalization--as under Nikita Khrushchev from 1955 to 1964 and during the period of "perestroika" under Mikhail Gorbachev -- Ukrainian communists pursued nationalist objectives. The 1986 explosion at the Chornobyl (Chernobyl in Russian) nuclear power plant, located in the Ukrainian SSR, and the Soviet Government’s initial efforts to conceal the extent of the catastrophe from its own people and the world, was a watershed for many Ukrainians in exposing the severe problems of the Soviet system. Ukraine became an independent state on August 24, 1991, and was a co-founder of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, although it has not officially joined the organization.
Wananchi, apropos mass action(s), the people of Ukraine and the people of Kenya have nothing in common. Two different states with two different polities! Neither is Kenya mass demonstrating any similar to Ukraine's. Some are even suggesting that because Raila and Uhuru came up with the iniquitous and sleazy idea of walking into Parliament, that it somewhat somehow represents the affirmation and judgement of the people of Kenya. Kenyans have been through tough times before. In fact, in Central Kenya, scores of indigenous Kenyans were savagely, inhumanely and frenziedly despotized and crucified during the fight for independence. It is inappropriate if not rude and obnoxious to crusade for these noisy types to be legitimizing such an action(s) while the law exists in Kenya. Such action is and should be actionable!
-unedited-
Maina
|
|
|
Post by aeichener on Jan 31, 2006 0:38:00 GMT 3
Also Kenyans are often very nervous about terms like "Storming" Parliament. It connotes a violent illegal act even though we know it is a simple political action. Kenyans are a peaceful people at heart. They will tolerate violence only when it is directed *against* them ;-). Alexander
|
|
|
Post by Daktari wa makazi on Jan 31, 2006 2:08:17 GMT 3
Maina, you have posted against the idea of mass protest and holding of parliamentary bussiness floated by Miguna on the basis that the said idea is against the rule of law.
The Kenyan Constitution provides for the right to protest and associate and the same can hardly be termed anti rule of law. From my humbling reading, mass protest and holding of parliamentary session seems to me to be peaceful demonstrations against a senile and inept order, which has yet to act against corruption. What do you propose? Sit on our hands and wait for Kibaki to act.
What you suggest is similar to terming the said mass protest treason. It is hard to think of a better tool for state repression than to stop people from protesting by urging them to respect rule of law. It is unfortunate that treason, a political crime, still exists on our Law Books many years after independence. I wonder where was your respect for the rule of law rhetoric when the thieves were looting the economy dry?
It doesnot end here. Kibaki can and has suspend parliament and ban all rights to assembly whenever he decides as per rule of law which is tatmount to selling our God-given rights to a dictator. The rule of law does not mean we sell our conscience to the highest bidder!
Protest is inseparable from democracy: every time it is restricted, the state becomes less democratic. Democracies like ours will come to an end not with mass protest and holding of kamkumji be it Parliamentary type or the common man type, but through the slow accretion of apologists who caution against our own right to demand an end to corruption through mass protest by claiming the same to be againt the rule of law or treason.
We are often told that such actions are dangerous because one day it might facilitate the seizure of power by an undemocratic government. But, that is to miss the point. The denial of mass protest IS the seizure of power by denial of human rights. If we listen to these voices we risk loosing our freedoms. By the time we have lost our freedoms, we will have forgotten what they were.
Yet, in the absence of an independent, investigative press, peaceful protest is now among the few means of raising the issues, which will determine the future course of most people’s lives. We are, as a result, entering a new age of activism.
In Kenya today, the dissenters appear to be coalescing, and a composite radical opposition movement is beginning to emerge. The emergence of ODM in the political platform is a significant step forward. These are, as a result, exciting times. I belief, while extra-parliamentary activism will make little difference to the outcome of the 2007 election, the concerns it expresses will become ever harder to ignore.
By the way, what was that all about Central Kenya and its indigenous people ( read Kikuyus) fight for independence to do with mass protest against the corrupt Kibaki regime?
|
|
|
Post by maina on Jan 31, 2006 3:33:30 GMT 3
Sadiq, Habari! I need to accentuate that there are no grounds of war between me and any person(s) with a craving or enthusiasm for peaceful mass action(s). As much as it a democratic right, it is also a constitutional one. However I'm against the types that are peculiarly avid and lustful to lead mass action(s) to parliament and somewhat somehow conduct and run parliamentary affairs in a prorogued parliament in their conceptualized lrole as leaders of conscientious politics. That is crooked, unauthorized, extralegal, felonious and forbidden. It sounds like having two parallel governments! No! It actually sounds more like a conspiracy, or more so a back stabbing analogous to the personality of Benedict Arnold! Now, do you see what I’m talking about? Since we know Kibaki to be intricately and brazenly corrupt, what makes one so sure that by even demonstrating truthfully in the wake of Uhuru’s and Raila’s noise, that he may not resort to his epithetical paper-tiger like acts such as say deploying the military to counter these mass action(s)? Secondly, why do you seem to cleverly avoid the impact connoted by the theory that unelected administrations/systems (read undemocratic) “seizing” power as a result of mass action(s)? Yet in somewhat of a Machiavellian style paradox, you assert that the opposition is united. How did we get here today? Wasn’t the opposition united in 2002? The bottom-line is that storming into parliament is ILLEGAL and ACTIONABLE!-unedited- Maina By the way, please do not blunderingly and recklessly assume that I am being tribal when I figured in (in my previous assertion) the numerous folks that were maimed and barbarically annihilated by the vile, no good and ugly colonialists during the independence conflict and undertaking. That was what instantaneously came to mind as I typed along. Besides, isn’t it unbiased and righteous to asseverate that they predominantly were from Central Province? Do facts change when it suddenly become convenient change them?
|
|
|
Post by miguna on Jan 31, 2006 5:07:04 GMT 3
My fellow countrymen (I've not seen a woman yet contribute on this thread):
Let me begin by saying that I appreciate all the incisive thoughts above. I was perhaps writing at the same time as Adongo, and therefore was unable to respond to him earlier. I will add a few things.
1. Maina - it has been long. I'm glad to see you around. I think you know me well enough to know where I stand. I will explain shortly for those who have only met me on cyber space.
2. I just wanted all of you to know that ODM has a copy of my thoughts. I have received confirmation today of its receipt. The one published here was abridged for this very purpose. But the ongoing debates enriches ODM's continued engagement.
3. Johns (Fidel) and I discussed these matters in detail three days before the ODM came down with the "reconvening" of Parliament. Although I originally flouted the idea during that conversation, I bear absolutely no responsibility for the final announcement. I suspect that those announcements only coincided with my discussions with Fidel. As I have said, the original idea was to have MPs simply "RECONVENE" on their own accord at Parliament Buildings and proceed with debates over all the outstanding issues. The suggestion was that depending on the "resolutions" emanating from Pariliament, the people's involvement would crystalize around the "dynamic developments" - whatever they would be...Many of these thoughts are being overtaken by events that rapidly unravel in Kenya as we debate. Adongo, Abdulmote, Job, Sadik and Roughrider are right to caution that "everything must be determined by the people." I think ODM is listening keenly. If they refuse to listen, we know what their fates will be.
4. I am not aware where the "storming" business came from. Press reports quoted Uhuru as having said something like that. And I used it in the article only as a "discussion point". However, since I have not confirmed it [but I will try doing so tonight], I do not know if Uhuru actually used that specific term/word. I know that Rutto, Raila, Balala, Magara and Kalonzo did not and have not. These are the FACTS!
But if Uhuru used the word "storm", I would be reluctant to assume that he meant it as "a violent attack" against the institution of Parliament. No matter what we may say about Uhuru and other ODM leaders, they are not prone to that kind of "recklessness."
Adongo is right that ODM should never threaten anything it is not capable of executing. The only rider I would add on Adongo's other comment that a lawyer does not ask any question when cross-examining if he or she does not know the answer already is that "it depends" on the situation. Many of you recall when F. Lee Bailey asked that Mkora policeman in the OJ Simpson trial the question - "Have you ever used the word N***er in describing any black person?", he did not know what answer the mkora would give. Of course, the mkora answered no. And at that time, many pundits scolded F. Lee for having damaged the case. Later, happenschance saved F. Lee. The point here is - at times, the situation determines the questions, and many important questions come naturally during such dramatic occasions, depending on answers, that, at times, were unknown until they would have been given....Of course, Adongo is right on the "general rule of thumb".
I personally believe that at this point ODM members only intend to "reconvene" Parliament. Obviously, the circumstances will dictate what comes out of it. If the people "demand" other "things", well, the people are the Boss; aren't they?
There is no law I am aware of that prevents the MPs or the people from doing what they have said they would do.
Contrary to Maina's suggestion [and Maina, you know that I know], there is no legal or constitutional provision that bars MPs from entering, occupying, debating and conducting business in Parliament.
I don't mean "occupation" in its Israeli-Palestine sense.
Even though Parliament is suspended, MPs go to Parliament daily. Parliamentary Committees still meet and discharge business. Parliamentary staff are working daily as usual. To assume that the suspension of Parliament extinguishes the role of MPs is astonishing, to say the least. Maina, I never suspected that you were capable of thinking this way.
5. Maina says that "reconvening" or "storming" Parliament is "actionable." It is a strange usage. Be that as it may, those claiming that going to Parliament by MPs or members of the public is actionable should immediately tell us CLEARLY under what laws they think the actions are "actionable."
It is certainly not in the Penal Code. It is not in the Constitution of Kenya either. Treason? Pliiiz!
So, where is it? Unless someone or some people deliberately do something aganst someone or something, which is clearly proscribed by law, simply shouting that the "thing" is actionable is to be honest with you, hogwash.
There is nothing illegal about the RECONVENING OF PARLIAMENT by Parliamentarians.
But even if there was a law baring such action [which I don't believe exsists], the act of "civil disobedience" is completely legitimate.
It is the duty of all law abiding and freedom loving citizens to DISOBEY an oppressive, inhumane and/or unjust law.
Yes, Maina, law can be UNJUST.
One example. If there is a law [and there once were many of these] designating you, as an Afrikan man, the status of an animal and requiring you to eat with dogs or feed on dog food when white people are entitled to live like human beings, would you think twice before breaking such an unjust law? If your answer is no, then my brother, I cannot debate you here or anywhere else. However, if your answer [as I suspect it will be] is "yes", then there is no reason why you should CONDEMN the call to reconstitute Parliament so that Kenyans can deal, legally/legislatively, with the Kibaki Wakora. I otherwise adopt Sadik's eloquent reply.
6. It is unfortunate that some people only see me as a lawyer and not as a person. Before I became a lawyer, I was a human being and a citixzen of Kenya. I am and will remain a human being first. .
Being a lawyer has never and cannot vitiate my democractic rights as a citizen of Kenya. And as a citizen, I have all the rights that other citizens have. These include the right to assemble, associate, speak, vote freely, etc.
By the way, voting is but a very tiny thing in the hierarchy of rights of a citizen.
As such, to suggest that a lawyer should only concern himself or herself with advising others is to say the least misguided indeed. If that was the price I had to pay to practice, believe you me Maina, I would have never become a lawyer. My responsibility, even as a lawyer, is to society first, before it is to the practice of law. Lawyering should be, first and foremost, public service. If that be the case, I do not see what error I have committed by supporting the call to reconvene Parliament. But that call was only necessary because of Kibaki's infractions. Had this Mkora not suspended Parliament as a political trick, this call would not have been necessary.
7. We cannot be held at ransom by Kibaki and his looting leutenants! If Kenyans must be criminalized for standing up against fascisistic behaviour - so be it. I will be very proud to serve in Kibaki's jail if that is the price I must pay for our freedom. The question you should be asking yourself is - which side am I on?
Maina, I give a wide berth to your other comments on Ukraine, etc. I don't think they were relevant to the discussion. We are all free to give whatever examples we believe would apply....Your opinion is yours; mine remain mine!
Enough said. [unedited]
PS: Adongo asked a question that I almost forgot to answer. That was on who was supporting what regarding this matter. The short answer is: Uhuru and Mutula Kilonzo are the two "central" people in ODM whose positions are not very "clear." The rest of the people are safely "within the tent." That, of course, can change any time. However, we should never worry about these....politics is like that all over the world....
-Miguna-
|
|
|
Post by maina on Feb 1, 2006 0:52:50 GMT 3
Miguna,
It’s been a long time. When I next dismount in Toronto, I will surely give you a call to officially thank you for your advice and guidance. Sometimes people get carried away in their “delusions” and have to go through a challenging but crucial recreation. Wise and trusted advice is always helpful since one never goes wrong. So once again, thank you very much.
I am sorry I couldn’t get back to post my return sooner. I was caught up watching the Nigeria-vs-Senegal Africa Cup of Nations match. It was a splendiferous and illustrious game. Quite similar to the theatrics put on by a lion and a lioness when they’re trying to outdo each other while chasing an agile and terrified antelope. I was backing Senegal because they had to pay dirt in order to advance onto the next stage but they lost (the core was 2-1).
Anyway, I’ll set out by first elucidating where I generally stand. I think it is important, particularly given the topic at hand as well as the scope and angle of my argument here. I will hereby illustrate it by making it as eye splitting and as thundering as possible lest anyone forgets.
I have been meeting a lot of Mount Kenya folks recently who exorbitantly exhibit their pharisaicalness and sanctimoniousness albeit in a mysteriously incomprehensible manner. These are the types who think that the presidency belongs to them eternally. In fact, they would garrison the presidency and make it unassailable! They have universally become hard-bitten, hard-boiled, hardhearted and heartless. These same types who are virulently hostile to democratic principles resulting from their tribal arrogance and greed. Those same ones who become all nerves and restless when their one self approved and self-blasted enemy from Bondo is mentioned! Yes, the DP freaks! Since it goes without saying that there are two types/gorups of people in Kenya today, I highly distrust that any of the aforementioned traits would suffice in the ABCs, while those of you who know me were to describe me to someone else (besides the Mount Kenya part, obviously)!
However, all of the follwowing is not to say that I am inimically combating the fact that you are in the know with matters pertaining to law itself. Miguna, it is my intimate opinion that you are an adroit, talented and a bodacious practitioner. That basically means that I will never argue with you in matters of assize, behest, et cetera, or the even their standards and assumptions with respect to the beautiful occupation of law! It also therefore, and as a result, crystal clear that my focal points and their attitudes are unmistakably legitimate and relevant to this argument. But please kindly correct me here if I am horribly misinformed.
Now to my take with regards to this becoming nut; “storming” into a prorogued parliament!
First off, when I mentioned what I thought your suppositional role is/was in this somewhat big affair, I didn’t imply that you should abrogate or squelch your democratic rights. Besides, I have never known you to be either “timid” or silenced anyway! However, I just cannot conceive why and how you seem to be unequivocally ratifying wrongful acts. More unfamiliar and perplexing is your supposition that there is no law that outlaws such illegal acts!
Conjure up the image of a man hurling stones at a police station building, for example. Whereas it is a downright criminal (even civil) offense to throw stones resulting in personal injury and property damage, is there a law anywhere today that precludes the same act when injury and damage are not resultant even though it is "perceived" to be an offense? What about the recent “Registrar episode” of the purported registration rackets? Please evince for me the law that enucleates penalties for the no good registrar’s actions! Isn’t it wise to surmise that she should have exercised due diligence and checked public records to clarify the particulars of the names of the parties she re-registered? But where is that written or recorded?
In fact I remember your exposition about it. You never seemed to pin point or refer to the "place" where such a law is to be found! How about Mwakenya? Weren’t you a club member that our rinky-dink former president was interminably pursuing? In any case, if you were captured for instance, would law(s) against traitorousness have been legitimate in its/their application to your prosecution? And by the way, just where are these laws that you supposedly broke to be found and what do they say with regards to their application and arraignment? Do they mention Mwakenya anywhere? Isn’t it confusing how you somewhat, in your own right as a Kenyan acquiesce and comply with the democratic element of peaceful mass action(s), but simultaneously and ubiquitously ratify duplicity, by supporting the illegal "reconvening" of parliament? Besides, how does one seriously talk of “storming into parliament” and “reconvening parliament” all in the same sentence anyway? You know, that actually brings me to my next locus or point rather.
You seem to analyze that the term “reconvene” is somehow more jolly and jovial to the ear in this context. One does not argue that because the English language was invented by the English, they cannot be reproved by anyone else (including you and me) other than their own, when they misspeak or misstate something in English. Take for instance an apple of discord that I was privy to between an American and an Englishman. Of all the things in the world to irresistibly argue about, they discriminated between the "elevator" or "lift" which they both obtruded respectively! Now Miguna, who do you think was right or wrong here? The Englishman was almost maleficent in his intentions to declare that he was right in calling the movable enclosed platform a "lift" since the English invented the language. But the Americans built the "elevator"! Which definition sounds more legal or more relevant, or rather more welcoming and affectionate for that matter? Whether it be "reconvening" or "storming", both acts are illegal and actionable with regards to MPs committing these acts in while parliament is in prorogation.
Miguna, on one Monday, I once heard you say that the “law is the law”, meaning that it is in force Monday through Monday. Therefore one cannot, and should not argue that he/she is blameless because he/she broke the law at night when the judges and lawyers were asleep or when the court houses were closed. Thieves are guilty of theft at night when they commit acts of theft while the whole city is asleep. If they are not caught in their acts does that mean that they are innocent?
The same case applies to ODM “storming” or “reconvening” at the precinct designated for the official duties of the legislature uncustomarily and wonderfully when it is against the law! Parliament is not open for any of its customary business at the present time. And just how do these MPs figure they’re conduct business without a Speaker? Are you evoking here that the Speaker shall be somehow conscripted and dragooned to perform his duties in a prorogued House when he has categorically and noisily stated that conducting the same in the Kenyan parliament at the present time is illegal? And then if the people “decide”, is the unwilling Speaker going to kidnapped? Isn’t that sonorously and recognizably similar to having two parallel governments albeit the latter one functioning under the auspices of the mob rule? Isn’t that akin to approbating nihilism?
Those calling for these acts are pretty much preaching treachery. The bottom line is that it is perceptibly illegal. Also, like I need say again, we know that Kibaki is pertinaciously unethical. Why give him the upper hand in our democratic struggle by artlessly and shamelessly breaking the law? Why can't these MPs just have mass actions withour "reconvening" or "storming" parliament in the name of the people?
Lastly, Miguna, you do not need to inform me that you were not born a lawyer. Surely, you know that I know that. A priest is not even born into his canonry or priesthood either, yet he remains holy his "entire" life. Neither is a monk or a nun for that matter born into his/her career, yet they essentially and fundamentally have responsibilities to society just like you.
What you are supposing in your argument is congruous to acceding that a sin committed by priest is not a sin or rather, one that is irrelevant on account of the mere fact that he/she is a priest! Besides, don’t they have the same rights you itemized?
That is squarely why it sounds ridiculous, if not perplexing to claim that you are not to be treated as a lawyer right here in Jukwaa or elsewhere, because you were not born a lawyer!
As much as being a lawyer is cool and super-duper, it is also desperately and powerfully corporal and excessively relevant in your interactions everywhere in the world today! It is even more allowable when you are flagrantly and positively in agreement with deeds of mass action(s) that are actionable because it pertains to who you are! Besides, I am wonderfully sure your passport, a universally accepted and approved legal identity document, sets down your occupation on the same page that your name appears! So why does it look like you are seriously trying to convince me here that a person can beautifully have multiple personalities and because of the mere fact of having them, somewhat somehow “get away” with it? You know the law. Francis Kaparo, the Speaker has already said it is illegal. Does one break a law in the name of the people since the law is unjust?
-unedited-
Maina.
|
|
|
Post by aeichener on Feb 1, 2006 0:59:26 GMT 3
Two screens full of empty rhetorics, and yet he manages to miss carefully the single main point:
the distinction between legality and legitimacy.
Alexander
|
|
|
Post by miguna on Feb 1, 2006 4:23:13 GMT 3
Maina,
It is amazing how two people could be communicating in the same language (or at least "think" that they are doing so), yet be completely be talking at cross purposes. You completely misunderstood me.
The only people that have committed crimes here (and we are speaking of proven crimes) are Kibaki, Getonga, Murungaru, Awori, Kiraitu, Mwiraria and all the other Master Thieves in the Kibaki Cabinet. The billions of shillings they stole are not in any doubt. They are the ones you should worry about; not some civil disobedience being discussed by those fed up by the Kibaki looting.
Any other FUTURE "crimes" you want to concoct as "being planned" by the ODM have not been committed. One can't commit a crime in the future... Perhaps a "conspiracy to commit a crime." But in this case, everyone is talking about "reconvening Parliament" openly.
What is the CRIME that you claim is actionable? Name it. Let us see it.
Do you seriously believe that Ole Kaparo is the final authority on anything legal or legislative? So Kaparo is always right? And do you seriously believe that Parliament cannot function without Kaparo? By the way, who gave Kaparo his job? Who can take that job away from Kaparo? Don't you know that Parliament can elect or appoint any MP a Speaker?
Come on, Maina, you mean you would like us to be this elementary here?
ODM's ultimatum hardly qualifies as a "conspiracy;" does it? In any event, if ODM has committed a crime, let Kibaki arrest them then. He has the powers to do so. And then let's see what EVIDENCE you or he bring forward. We shall test the evidence once you bring it forward.
I can't wait for the opportunity to show those bumbling idiots a thing or two...
And lastly, it is obvious that you have not read (or at least, "not carefully" read) my other article on "THE REGISTRAR SHOULD BE CHARGED...".
Go back and read the entire article and then come back and tell me that I did not specify the sections of the Penal Code under which the Registrar of the Deputy Registrar could be charged.
Maina, for us to debate, we should try to adhere to some basic tenets in debates - the first and principal one is: "Do not respond to anything until you have carefully read and completely understood it." That way, we can avoid these misunderstandings.
Otherwige, good luck. [unedited] -Miguna
PS: And yes, you confused "legitimacy" and "legality".
|
|
|
Post by maina on Feb 1, 2006 8:05:51 GMT 3
Miguna,
There are only two things here that I solemnly agree with you in; firstly, that there are proven crimes of grand theft by Kibaki and his bunch, and secondly, the fact that we are communicating in the same language but at cross-purposes. However, I like to think that I was articulate though.
Another concern that was a powerful botheration to me and one that you have now unanimously unriddled here is what you are now referring to as “civil disobedience”. That unconditionally has nothing to do with “reconvening parliament” or “storming into parliament”. Now, I guess we can communicate effectively and efficiently.
Civil disobedience is nonviolent and is characterized by passive resistance. It is not illegal. I support anyone with hankers for civil disobedience because it basically pertains to the refusal to obey civil laws in an effort to induce change in government policy. I will not kick around anybody with this keenness and purpose. Similarly, there is no doubt that ODM’s ultimatum is excellently satisfying.
Lastly Miguna, hear you: "Do you seriously believe that Ole Kaparo is the final authority on anything legal or legislative? So Kaparo is always right? And do you seriously believe that Parliament cannot function without Kaparo? By the way, who gave Kaparo his job? Who can take that job away from Kaparo? Don't you know that Parliament can elect or appoint any MP a Speaker?" Now, are you seriously presupposing that a parliament can function consummately without a Speaker? The Speaker of the Kenyan National Assembly has his solitary, assured and indispensable role as the Speaker. As such, the Members have the legal and legislative final authority because they appoint the Speaker and debate bills as well as vote on them, et cetera. But more importantly, all this happens when the parliament is in session, not when it is on break, or deferment, or deferral, or intermission, or interruption, or suspension, or even prorogation! The speaker’s job does not cease when the parliament is prorogued either. Only MPs can terminate the Speaker’s priceless service (and again, only when parliament is in session). Therefore Kaparo is still the Speaker in his own right and his story can only change were parliament to be legally recalled.
-unedited-
Maina.
|
|
|
Post by kamalet on Feb 1, 2006 8:39:28 GMT 3
1. Can a meeting of MPs pass legislation contrary to the provisions of the constitution?
2. Assuming that the ODM MPs do actually meet within the presincts of parliament, can they actually make anything legal?
3. Considering that there are 5 weeks to the inaugration of the 4th session of parliament, is it that what has been happening in the last two weeks cannot wait the 5 weeks? - bear in mind that ALF did not start 5 weeks ago!
4. Assuming that these people may have a the backing of the people, apart from just condemning the government in the house is there anything they can hope to achieve after that? Perhaps we can say public opinion can be swayed - but is it not already swayed even without parliament having to reconvene?
5. Are we not suspicious of the sudden urge to get parliament back to work when they actually struggle to raise a quorum even to pass the most pressing legislation to serve Kenyans?
|
|
|
Post by aeichener on Feb 1, 2006 10:48:21 GMT 3
Maina: you still miss the essential point, though now in more brevity.
Kamalet: your questions are sober. I am not sure whether I agree with the direction of them, but at least you dispel some empty rhetorics with your "keep-it-real" approach. Thank you for that.
Alexander
|
|
|
Post by ndauosa on Feb 1, 2006 12:22:29 GMT 3
I must admit that the argument is quite spirited and inspirational to me both in terms of the highly vocabularised language and the legal references.
I guess wanjiku always finds herself in an okward position, struggling to understand what their leaders mean, in most times. some things are simple yet we make them look complex and very complicated.
The simple approach of language by the likes of Hon. Raila, gets him the grassroot support and influence of power he wields with him. whenever he talks and argue his point he leaves no doubt on the minds of the people of what he means.
My admission and respect to your prowess in the use of the foreign language should not make you think for a second that either of you is superior and can nyanyasa me, kwenye Jukwaa. i believe that the English that i learnt was to pass my exams and to communicate in the line of my Job.Otherwise sheng is my language.
|
|
|
Post by abdulmote on Feb 1, 2006 12:38:19 GMT 3
Gentlemen,
I can see the two of you engaged in a high-octane wrestling of your minds here! Complex as your arguments and observations may appear to be about the subject contents, I would opt for a much simpler hypothesis on the same.
If I have understood the arguments put forth so far and without being specific, it is fair to say that all that magnificent linguistic array above points towards very simple residues; firstly, maina is arguing that the “storming” or “reconvening” of the Parliament by the MPs is in itself “illegal”, that the act is indeed unconstitutional since the law is very clear as to who has the authority to do so, and in fact it is only the President who can legally satisfy that responsibility. Secondly, Kamale points out that despite the MPs proposed ‘gathering’ at the Parliament if one is ever going to materialise, cannot in effect produce any ‘legal’ actions against the government, that the whole exercise is nothing but just a fuss!
In response to the above arguments I would like to add and state just s few simple points:-
1. First of all I would like to give my views on the term “storm” or “storming the Parliament” for that matter. I see absolutely NOTHING wrong about the term’s usage and therefore would not attempt to apologise about it! Harsh or aggressive you may perceive the term to be, I can only think that it is just and appropriate to use the same.
Why do I say so?
The more persistently I ponder about the unfolding political characteristics of our representatives, the more I form an impression that many are cautiously, unnecessarily and futilely concerned with treating the government of Mwai Kibaki in velvet gloves! Whilst on the contrary, Mwai Kibaki himself appears to be hardly bothered at all about his behaviour and how his government chooses to carry out its responsibilities, in serving the people who literally gave them their mandate in those offices and positions in the first place! Gentlemen, they are the SERVANTS and we are the MASTERS, full stop!
In saying that, I am not naïve enough to miss the point of lives at risk and that the government has indeed the “monopoly” as it were of “violence”! But this is precisely the point; When a government which enjoys its mandate through the expression of the people chooses to ignore or in fact abuse that given mandate as can be seen, particularly against the very same people who elected it in office, that government deserves to be challenged and CONFRONTED, aggressively and firmly so, by the collective will of the people, that it may repent and withdraw from its acquired misappropriated position, irrespective of the risks involved! Otherwise there will be only one outcome – ENSLAVEMENT of the people!
Ironically and so to speak, Kibaki would not have been the President today, were it not for the courage of those who were prepared to and in fact did loose their lives towrads the fight for multiparty democracy just a few ago! Kibaki would not have been in office today, were it not for the courage of the people in declaring their resolve and emanding for their wishes to be recognised irrespective of whatthe Constitution was saying at the time!
Bu then, is this not simply a continuation of that very same fight which promises never to go away until all has been realised? Is anyone here suggesting that Kibaki's "getting" into the Statehouse satisfies all of the people's demands and so all must naively keep mum and simply bear all irrespective of the 'robbery' and the betrayal of trust taking place? For the Peopl'e sake, let Kamukunji be the people's Parliament as it was before but the people must be heard!
2. I say using the term “storming” is right because here and in effect, the people are demanding and reclaiming what they have wrongly and dishonestly been deprived of, what in fact is rightfully theirs! Yeh, “storming” against a 'ROBBER' is bang on! Don’t even mention the word ‘apologise’!
Secondly, it is pretty obvious that the current Constitution contains clauses that are simply and purely “DRACONIAN” in nature. In fact and indeed, this is the very reason why the people have resolved to have the WHOLE Constitution expunged from our statute books! If anything and as a matter of fact, the very clauses that are being used to prorogue the Parliament are some of the most prominently abhorrent and despicable contents of the said Constitution, and indeed they have been precisely targeted for removal in the proposed alterations which have been mischievously, recklessly and selfishly obstructed by Kibaki's government! Did you say that we have to be ‘tolerant’ to the only piece of written law such as our current Constitution in this case?
I say NO we don’t! Why should we if at all? Was Kibaki not elected in, simply and purely on the pledge that he was going to ‘get’ Kenyans the constitution that they want within ONE HUNDRED DAYS of NARC taking over? Was it not him who pledged “zero tolerance” on corruption the first day of being sworn in? Did the people not vote for him, specifically and purely for the reason that this filthy Constitution was going to be shoved into the garbage bins almost immediately he takes over? Now what?
But then, can’t you see the magnitude of hypocrisy and dishonesty that is Kibaki’s government almost THREE AND A HALF YEARS since he had taken over? Do you not think this hurts and continues to hurt? Does this process not DIRECTLY result in the deaths of many as we can imagine of taking place every day amongst th every innocent Kenyans? Do people have to be seen to be dying only through the bullet for them to be seen to be killed? Democracy? People’s choice? Is it? Really?
Yeh, I am not there and I can say what ever I want! But yes, I cry in pain every day I wake up to these miseries that are befalling upon my brothers and sisters but only through sheer greed, dishonesty and betrayal of trust innocently bestowed upon the government of Kibaki! But again believe you me brothers, I would not have hesitated to “storm” that Parliament had I been able to do that right now, and so declare my stand irrespective of the consequences thereof!
And what be the purpose, Kamale asks?
Stop being applying juvenile thinking to this issue brother! The action of “storming” the Parliament is not being instigated so that any may begin to formally “legislate” as we may desperately seem to want! That is not the simple purpose.
But rather, the action is purely symbolic as a declaration of demand, by the people and for the people, that the people have had enough and are now ready to reclaim what is rightfully theirs, and that is the right to be heard!
The storming of the Parliament is meant to demonstrate the people’s resolve and perception, that the government of Mwai wa Kibaki has absolutely failed them and so demand for its removal right now and henceforth correctly and absolutely so! By storming the Parliament, the people would be stating that they have had enough and that they can wait no more for changes that seem never to come! The people can never stand to be rapped and betrayed, time and again with no end in sight and this may be the only way to make their statement.
What then?
The way out is simple; Kibaki must now and immediately recall the Parliament so that the people’s voices can deliberate upon their affairs in fulfilment of their demand, and that they may be able to determine their own destiny.
Otherwise and if Kibaki remains to be stubborn and characteristically silent against the people’s desperate screams and shouts, the ODM must persistently continue to pressurise Kibaki and his goons, democratically on behalf of their electorates and so establish a firm stand on behalf of democracy and the right to be heard as provided universally in all good and sensible humanright laws!
P.S; ndauosa, I don't blame you for your comments. I can fully understand and appreciate your feelings.
|
|
|
Post by aeichener on Feb 1, 2006 13:26:55 GMT 3
Abdulmote: Let's put the whole thing simpler and shorter, for the proverbial benefit of Wanjiku.
In a functioning state, the law must be respected by the citizens.
But in a state which itself does not respect the law, but flagrantly and repeatedly breaks it at whimsy, how can it be expected that the law be respected by this state's subjects?
Alexander
|
|
|
Post by maina on Feb 2, 2006 3:52:03 GMT 3
Fellow Kenyans, Alexander, you’re right, I do not know Constitutional Law like you.... . All I have care about (until recently, as you can tell) is its basic and elementary principles such as voting rights, freedom of speech, freedom of opinion and affiliations, freedom of dress, et cetera. The more I think about it, the uglier it gets in my mind. Believe me, the little I know with respect to the law is beginning to solidly becloud and bemuse me. I feared that that would befall me from debating with Miguna and it surely has! So could someone here please kindly “itemize” what is legal and what is legitimate with regards to ODM’s ultimatum? Categorically also, please expound on what the legal and legitimate “threshold” of civil disobedience is with respect to ODM’s ultimatum? This is a constant bother to me because of the President’s silence. As much as Kenya is our country and is therefore important to all of us, one wonders what is going on at State House. I’ve even got myself pondering whether the President goes to bed at night and whether he sleeps peacefully. Doesn't the ODM matter to him? Is he ignoring the kind and generous "leeway" given to him through the ultimatum. From his silence one may predicate that he is in turn weakening his presidency and perhaps causing division in the cabinet and Nak? But given his aloofness yet cagey traits, I am beginning to cringe every moment. I am apprehensive about the whole interpretation and its consequences. Maina. -unedited-
|
|