Referendum - NOBODY WINS!

[abdulmote]

Yes, if and when the referendum gets to go through, I cannot see any winner crossing the line.

Why do I say so?

If the No side wins, it simply means that the status quo - constitutionwise - remains! It also means that Kenyans will have to start affresh and seek to have the constitution they want be put back on track. It means we shall all be pushed back to square one!

In the mean time a lot of money and perhaps lives would have been lost for nothing. In fact the only gain if you may choose to call it as such, is that Kenyans would have got another opportunity to fight once again for the their long awaited constitution one more time!

If the Yes side wins, similarly I can foresee nothing out of the results but a huge loss for all the people of Kenya! Why? Because with such a division within the opinionated populace as regards the new Constitution, I can imagine the displeasure the 'yes' win will generate behind the significant 'nos'. Besides, I still stand by my earlier analysis on Wako's Bill and its potential pitfalls, which will inevitably in my opinion, only result in total chaos for the nation as a whole! In fact scarry as I may not wish to imagine, one cannot entirely rule out on the possibility of bloodshed amongst Kenyans due to consequencies of the undesired results.

What solution then?

I am inclined to endorse what The Nation was suggesting the day before. Renegotiate the contentious issues once again and just grab that opportunity of ironing out those sticky bits before the referendum!

That way peace is more assured for all Kenyans and perhaps Kenyans may also get what they trully want and desire sooner than later, without the unnecessary costs attached to it.

Otherwise who said we are going to give up halfway in between, simply because some nuthead decided that all has been done when infact nothing has been achieved towards getting the constitution that we want?

[Onyango Oloo]

Abdul:


Mambo? Salama Lakini?

I have a couple of things that I am champing at the bit to say in response, but I will curb my enthusiasm and hear what others have to say...

Onyango Oloo
Toronto

[kamalet]

One thing that is certain to happen is that Kenyans will quickly forget this thing as soon as it passes (either way) and the fear mongering we see being peddled is not true.

I read the Nation piece and was actually surprised that they could actually take that position. It is obvious that it is made out of selfish reasons, and is representative of the thinking of the business community in Kenya. First and foremost, they would like the constitutional process to end quickly so people can go back to making money without a lot of politicking, but are equally anxious of the consequencies of a stalemate.

The proposal that the contentious issues be debated again and amendments passed prior to November 21st is curious in that it is coming too late. Positions have been taken by both camps, and they are extreme. Secondly, it is not clear how such consensus can be reached since goal posts are moved at every turn by the interested parties.

You will recall the headlines after the Naivasha accord about a break through being reached and hopes that we would finally have this matter resolved. Unfortunately, the contents of the Naivasha Accord were good, but the spirit was bad! Why will this change now? I do not think it will.

Kenyans should be able to now make their decision that if the Wako draft is bad, then we stay with the old constitution and await the re-starting of the process or pass it and see the consequencies!

At the moment, the fight has moved away from the contents, the process and into succession politics - do not waste your time talking about negotiations! Kenyan politicians have a higher interest than even You Abdulmote.

[roughrider]

I baffled by the way some people are now talking. Renegotiate what? Abdulmote I am surprised at you. Kamale I expect must talk like that, he is so drunk with NAK he cannot appreciate any other position.

We must go to the ballot and say NO. So that it is clear what we DO NOT want. This does not mean we want the current constitution.

The people who are saying that we are spending a lot of money are scaremongers who don’t know the first thing about economics. The government can pay hundreds of polling clerks, spend another 6 billion – this is money in the pockets of Kenyans, money that will be spent on consumption and savings… no leakages. In fact this is probably good for our economy. Ask John Maynard Keynes.

But that aside, the opportunity cost of a faulty constitution is just too high… decades of economic marginalisation, misgovernance, corruption, political assasinations, human rights violations, impunity, despondency and other things.

If we had the kind of constitution we are asking for Goldenberg would never have happened. Kiraitu would not be wasting my money on partisan political positions; Kibaki would not be taking his relatives and friends to shop in New York on public money…

In fact kenya was just like Singapore 40 years ago. But we began playing around with our frameworks, changing the law to allow dictatorship. We spent time consolidating power, Kenyatta introduced grand theft and organised assainations - killing JM and TJ. Meanwhile Singapore was laying the foundation for a modern economy.

Money spent on constitutional review is a worthy investment. Wastages are the result of power hungry politicians. In fact we will ensure that Kibaki and his allies pay for the wasted funds since they are the o0nes who forced an unwanted, alien document on Kenyans.

Kamale is lying. I know for a fact that the Nation position was sponsored by the government on sensing defeat to see how people would react. As soon as it was clear the Orange group would have none of it they had Kibaki rushing to reject as well.

There has been one consistent organisation in Kenya. NSIS: The intelligence people. And they have consistently told Mwai Kibaki that he is losing the referendum. This is what causing jitters in government is and why they are sponsoring lots of fake ‘postpone’ and ‘renegotiate’ caucuses. They even tried to gather parallel intelligence from the PC's and DC's who said basically the same thing: People dont want that thing.

But some people have a short memory:

[/i] There is another constitution that is ready and that we want. It is called the Bomas draft and that is the only constitution we will be talking about…

Just as soon as we say NO.

[kamalet]

RR,

I am curious to know what is this that you expect from me that is exemplified by my intoxication with NAK. I am equally curious that you are unhappy with Abdulmote for suggesting that the Nation position was correct and his support for it. Which is this other position that is not expected of me? I have discussed why I do not agree with the postponement - and I thought that was the position that you also held?

What I find interesting is that whilst I disagree with Abdulmote, I am wrong, but Abdulmote is also wrong for agreeing the same thing I disagree with!! Are these heady times causing you so much confusion RR?

My advise to you is that you need not get too emotional about this thing. You only have ONE vote like me and the other fellow, and our exchanges in these forums have absolutely no effect on the national census ofthe referendum - so do not get all twisted up!!

Another thing before calling me a liar- I disagree with you. I disagreeertion about the feeling of the business community is premised from personal association with such leaders who think that way. But you go too far and suggest that you know for a fact that the Nation story was sponsored. Perhaps so that I can take you more seriously when you make such assertions, can you provide the FACTS? I honestly do not think you have the facts.

[roughrider]

Kamale,

You said the story was sponsored by the business community and that was my point of departure. That is the position I expect you to articulate because it deflects us from the true position that NAK leaning people were behinnd this whole story and the quiet arguments that went behind it.

The idea was to provide the president with a soft landing and way out after he had taken a partisan position and the vote was being interpreted as a vote aginst him and his government.

Remember no journalist put his name to the stories that day. Yet I have discussed this with some journalists who confirmed this.

The theory about business people is baseless. Most CEO's have said they do not anticipate the referendum interfering with business and at least a recent surevey is in the public domain on this. Lets not twist things. We all know what a good constitution can and will do for the economy and for business.

[kamalet]

RR,

No where did I suggest that the story was sponsored by the business community - instead I suggested that it represented the thinking of the business community. Obviuosly two different things!

The story byline was EDITOR and not a group of reporters or anything like that.

All I can tell you is that those are your feelings about Kibaki looking for a soft landing. I can assure you that the Yes campaigners are exuding as much confidence of success as the No campaigners, so this thing could go either way.

I do not now think you have a feel of the business community. Their problem is not the referendum - it is the aftermath that they are concerned about. To them a No vote represent continous wrangling that hurts their business [ let me qualify here that I am not scaremongering to support the Yes vote!!], but I can assure that is the thinking with some business leaders.

[roughrider]

A YES result might portend an even bigger nightmare.

The difficulties will begin shortly with any attempt to implement that draft. The most recent example of the nightmares in the Wako draft I have seen is the way mathematician Mungai Kihanya shows the numbers in parliament to be unimplementable.

allafrica.com/stories/200509250160.html


What is worse is the constitutional crisis we MUST face when the illegality of this process becomes clear. We may disagree on whether this is a problem or not but - in the event of YES - it will be a matter of acrimonious contention. We who reject this constitution and its process have clearly shown that the numbers we have cannot be ignored – whatever the result.

[kamalet]

I think we will just have to use the maxim that the minority must be heard, but the majority musthave their way!! Ama?

As for the mess that is the Wako draft....we can point these out, but we must also not lose sight of that which is good in the same document!

[Onyango Oloo]

....I am just back in Nairobi after attending earth-shaking 'orange' rallies in Western Kenya. From what I can see, Nyanza (95%), Western (60%), Coast (75%), North Eastern (55%), Eastern (55%), Nairobi (60%) and Rift Valley (65%) are all gone. If Kibaki still insists the Bananas have it, I am completely at a loss what his game-plan is.

Have a good day.

[abdulmote]

Gentlemen,

Thank you so much for your responses. I can certainly see the passion behind your words. But passion it is and that is what I have always been afraid off. Scared I am of my personal emotions lest they cloud my rational being out of existence.

RR brother, please don’t be surprised by my thinking at any time on any given issue. I can categorically assure you that mine is not and indeed will never be, a biased or corrupted opinion and that is a position I shall strive hard to maintain for the remainder of my breathing life!

And the reason for my decision?

I can see and appreciate the pleasure either win is going to generate amongst the partisan sponsors. But when I had decided that mine was going to be a NO and not a Yes, I had come to that conclusion out of what I believe to be a very objective analyses of Whako’s Draft and not simply by tagging along any of the groups making the current noises whatsoever! And with that I feel good and proud about myself! May I also say that I gladly perceive yours and various others’ to have been made based on the same premise.

Having said that, I have since not stopped asking myself what this exercise will eventually bring about to Kenyans and indeed the proponents of either Yes or No once it is completed and done with.

For me, the whole exercise is simply futile right from the beginning. In fact I am even on record asking that the same be ‘called off’ when the Bill had just been released for public consumption. My reasons were the same and perhaps still are.

Firstly and without any doubt the document was illegally formulated throughout its formation. Secondly, the Yes win is potentially not going to give the public the significant and minimum required satisfaction it has been yearning for, critical in support for its sustenance, and hence may not necessarily mark the end of the Constitutional squabbles!

Thirdly, whilst even the Bomas’ Draft may be inherently flawed, the Whako’s Draft is in my opinion far worse, be it in its smaller fraction, in that once enacted the consequences thereof can be alarmingly catastrophic to the whole nation to say the least. We have already debated a lot regarding the same and I need not repeat myself.

As for the NO win, firstly, it is clearly obvious that the result will not provide us with the New Constitution which we all so much desire but we shall simply remain with the same old rag we have always wanted to get rid off! Secondly, it also means that the proponents for the New Constitution (and I do not mean Whako’s), will have to strategise afresh and continue to press newly for that document which promises never to be swept aside!

Thirdly, by looking at the potential prospects of prolonged agitation for the New Constitution, it is true to say that a lot cannot be casually ignored and this includes; national economic costs, citizens’ emotional and physical costs, possible psychological fatigue among the populace, rundown and un-attended public needs, and various other costs to name but just a few!

Forthly, whilst a NO win may bring about some emotional and euphoric satisfaction to a significant section of the population, perhaps including myself, that win may not necessarily translate into any tangible or significant cause, which may bring about any desired change the whole nation has been so much yearning for! Fact is Kebaki will continue, and legitimately so, to rule Kenya under the existing and current Constitution and that cannot be questioned. Fact also is that the referendum loss on Kebaki may not necessarily be enough a reason to wipe out his government out of existence as some may wish to imagine. But worst of all as far as I am concerned, is the possibility that as a genuine patriotic Kenyan, I feel that we would have wasted so much which we could have otherwise utilised to achieve the same desired results, only sooner and not later, and by using the same energy costs which would otherwise have to go wasted down the emotional drain given the postulated outcome above! If at all our aim is to bring about th erealisation of OUR New Constitution as we all desire, Bomas or otherwise, logic would dictate that the best opportunity to do the same is the nearest one before any further and unnecessary losses which will inevitably be incurred should we go all the way as it is! After all RR, are we going to abandone our quest once we have realised the NO win?

If it happens that I may have missed a significant potential gain should the NO vote win, please enlighten me that I may change my thinking from the current.

[abdulmote]

Quote: Originally posted by abdulmote in The Nation Forum on 29/08/2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I say bravo to all those voices of reason who are up and against this heinous draft which is proposed to be our constitution. Indeed the small part which is the result of usurpation of democratic powers honestly given by the innocent public, renders the whole document as vile and an abuse of the people's generosity and trust. It thus follows that this process MUST BE STOPPED at all costs in its tracks, for to allow it to thrive on the people's naivety, is to perpetuate our own destruction!

And whilst some have initiated legal proceedings towards that effort, the courts should have treated this case as a matter of urgency and of utmost public interests and concern, and therefore should not have prolonged the agony that we have to endure.

In this regard, I find it as naivety of the highest order, to proceed with the direction towards the referendum, because to do so would be to assume legitimacy of the process, by allowing the draft to be decided upon, as if it had been created legally and honestly so!

In saying that, I strongly believe that it is the people's absolute and democratic right, to strongly protest and refuse to be dictated upon, especially where and when their fundamental rights are being abused and trumped upon!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And this other comment as well...

Quote: Originally posted by abdulmote on 29/08/2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...I have no doubt that there will never be a desirable atmosphere as we would have wished, which will facilitate the ideal climate for creating the just constitution. Rather, it falls upon those who can figure out the way forward, with honesty and true dedication, to fight it out with the backing of the innocent and courageous citizen who have an absolute ability to win in this uncompromisable task.

Just imagine this; if the NARC government which was voted in with such a huge and popular mandate has become what it has become in its betrayal of the people's trust, what makes you think that there may be others who will simply remain honest and true to their word for the lifetime of their positions and status?

On the other hand, it falls upon those who are in unshakeable position of demanding for true transparency, accountability and justice, to vigorously fight on behalf of the people, and with the support of the people, till there builds enough momentum to be able to realise what the people trully deserve and want.


And if the righteous should fail to fullfill their God given mandate, then their passiveness and idleness of their minds, will only be a positive effort towards perpetuation of our own collective destruction!

But what is more important than all of the above, is to be alert and aware of the timing and promptness so required, to iniate that fight, lest any delays serve to enhance and strengthen the abilities of the people's enemies!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[kamalet]

Abdulmote,

Your reasons in seeking this postponement are valid. Kenyans should not be divided by this process as is happening today.

But we also need to look into the reasons why we are in the mess we find ourselves in. Kenyans lost the plot at Bomas when political and other competing interests overtook the overwhelming need for consensus.

Whilst there have been people deeply concerned about consensus, there have been others that have pulled away constantly. Take for instance Sulumetti I and II, if competing political interests had not taken over these efforts, would we be having a constitution today? I can say the same of the Naivasha effort too.

My point is that there is little goodwill amongst the politicians to help Kenyans out. Unfortunately, we have allowed ourselves to be sucked into their machinations, and today the debate is no longer about what Kenyans wanted. We now have people who are linking this process with 'bad governance' and poverty!

The intentions are very good, but the will is totally non-existence! As I said, let's get over this thing and move on!

[roughrider]

Abdulmote:

The importance of going on with the referendum is based on a simple and widely accepted democratic notion.

A government that supports a partisan position in a referendum must, if it looses resign because the loss is also a loss of confidence and popular mandate.

One needs to look at the french non, or even the steps taken by Junichiro Koizumi in Japan recently.

This is the basis of the call to have the referendum proceed. Our country has been witnessing political division and acrimony since 2002 for the simple reason that a supposedly collegial government elected on a pro-reform ticket has failed to deliver.... and instead metamorphosed into a minority anti reform dictatorship (my opinion).

The Kenyan referendum will help us determine which group - the Kibaki loyalists who are reinventing Moism and the Pro-Bomas Wanjikuists - has the mandate to determine the next steps of the constitutional review.

Saying NO to the proposed Katiba is saying NO to the current one since they are significantly not different.

[abdulmote]

Rough Rider!

How I wish!

I had almost forgotten that there is such a thing as "widely accepted democratic notion" in Kenyan politics! I mean look around you. Aren't the leading members of the Orange Team also members of Kibaki's government which they so much criticise of failure correctly so or otherwise? What then would have been that 'common accepted democratic notion' in such a case? But would you say that that is indeed the case?

As to the outcome of the Referendum being the determinant factor in justification of who carries on with the Constitution thing, my reaction to that is that is certainly not the case!

In my opinion, what we have to understand is that irrespective of the decision of voting on the same, it does not categorically imply that the voters are doing so in supporting a No vote or indeed a Yes vote! On the contrary, it should simply mean that the public is either saying no to the Draft as given, or that it is simply saying yes. And that is, without the Kiraitus or Railas being the motivating factors behind their specific decisions! Simply put and in other words, the public's approval or dissapproval of the referndum does not, technically speaking, endors or reject the controvertial persons behind the same!

Which means, to make the long story short, the Referendum results once realised and should it it be the NO win, will not qualify or indeed disqualify either party to be the 'legitimate' movers of the Constitution creation process, despite what the public may seem to desire out of that outcome!

P.S: If you'd ask me, I'd say I don't and would never trust any of the involved parties to represent my interests to say the least!