Ref:http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982704&cid=4&PHPSESSID=85a8601eb1888e347b2ff7ee2c3bb89c
Published on March 3, 2008, 12:00 am
By Martin Mutua
The list of Kenyans banned from travelling to some European Union countries and the United States grew to 20, even as mystery deepened over a Cabinet minister blocked from travelling to Geneva, Switzerland, on official duty.
Sources within the diplomatic and security circles told The Standard that as many as 20 individuals may not be allowed to enter some foreign countries.
The individuals, mainly politicians and businessmen, are being accused of either playing a role in the post-election violence or frustrating the ongoing mediation talks.
But before Kenyans could be told who the Cabinet minister denied a visa to Geneva was following media reports on Sunday, Justice minister Ms Martha Karua — who had not been named in our reports — sprung a swift denial that she had been blocked from travelling to the Switzerland. Karua spoke during a well-attended news conference she called to dismiss the media reports.
Karua, however, indicated that she would not sue both The Sunday Standard and KTN over the matter but she had lodged a complaint with Media Council of Kenya for inaccurate reporting.
"If I was denied my country’s citizenship, I would be mourning but to be denied a visa for some far-flung country wouldn’t bother me," she added.
Karua said contrary to the reports, she had obtained a visa to travel to Geneva on Friday, February 29, and showed the media a copy of her passport containing the visa.
"I declined to travel and instead asked my Permanent Secretary to make the statement on behalf of the country as is the usual practice in such circumstances," she added.
Karua said both KTN and The Sunday Standard should have verified the truth with her or her office before airing and publishing the "inaccurate reports", adding that the code of conduct for journalists called for accuracy in reporting.
The minister hit out at donor countries from the West for issuing threats and warnings of visa bans when the negotiations were still in progress.
Karua said any donor who pulled out money for certain projects when the country had a problem was a disruptive one who should not have been there in the first place.
"Last year, we financed our Budget without donor support and therefore with or without donors Kenya will still continue," she added.
Shelve travel bans
And Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka asked the international community to be part of the Kenyan peace process by shelving all the bans and threats.
"In the wake of the peace deal and political settlement that we had, they should shelve these bans so as to consolidate the gains. They (victims of the bans) would love to participate in the implementation process and it will be not be a good gesture for them to be victimized.
On her political relationship with ODM leader Mr Raila Odinga — which has in the past been largely frosty — Karua indicated her willingness to work with all ODM members in government.
"I was with them (ODM negotiators) at Serena on the same table and we agreed on certain issues and differed on others. That does not mean we cannot work together and also it will not mean that we shall not differ," she added.
Karua said the onus was now on the leaders to ensure that the Dr Kofi Annan brokered deal worked because it was Kenyans who would be the beneficiaries.
The minister, a lead negotiator in the government team, said contents of the deal was what the PNU and ODM teams had been negotiating about but it was only the timing they had differed about.
"Our point of difference was that nothing should have been done outside the constitutional framework and that it should have been part of the comprehensive reform," she added.
Karua further said that as negotiators, they were just messengers of their principals and when working in a group, they were obliged to listen to their command.
At the same time Karua maintained that perpetrators of violence and violators of human rights would not be let off the hook.
Karua said she still held the view that the government must observe the rule of law as well as respect for human rights.
Monday, 03 March 2008
Commentary (by Ben Agina) - South African judge to chair poll review team
Ref: http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982705&cid=4&PHPSESSID=85a8601eb1888e347b2ff7ee2c3bb89c
Published on March 3, 2008, 12:00 am
By Ben Agina
Former head of South Africa’s Independent Electoral Commission, Judge Christiaan Kriegler, is to chair the Independent Review Committee that will investigate the 2007 General Election, The Standard has learnt.
The committee, which commences its sittings on March 15, will investigate all aspects of the presidential election and make findings and recommendations to improve future electoral processes.
Kriegler, 76, headed South Africa’s Independent Electoral Commission, which ran the country’s first democratic elections in 1994, and was instrumental in establishing the permanent electoral commission, which he chaired until 1999.
The committee will be a non-judicial body made up of recognised Kenyan and non-Kenyan electoral experts, who have the highest professional standing and personal integrity.
The Independent Review Committee was established following approval by the two negotiating teams during the mediation talks.
During discussion on Agenda Three, the parties explored the options of presidential vote re-tallying, recounting and immediate elections.
However, both teams concluded that the only viable solution to the crisis was a political settlement.
ODM had, during the deliberations at Serena Hotel, proposed the formation of an independent review committee on the disputed presidential elections, strengthening the independence of Parliament and the reconstitution of ECK.
The ODM Party leader, Mr Raila Odinga, has already forwarded names of his representatives to the Committee. They are Mrs Catherine Muyeka Mumma and Mr Francis Angila Aywa.
The committee will submit its report within three to six months, following which it will be made public within 14 days.
Kriegler practiced as an advocate in Johannesburg for 25 years before he became a provincial and thereafter appellate judge. He was appointed a judge of the Constitutional Court on its formation in 1994.
After leaving that court he held a two-year acting judicial appointment chiefly engaged in judicial education and the training of public prosecutors and practicing advocates.
Published on March 3, 2008, 12:00 am
By Ben Agina
Former head of South Africa’s Independent Electoral Commission, Judge Christiaan Kriegler, is to chair the Independent Review Committee that will investigate the 2007 General Election, The Standard has learnt.
The committee, which commences its sittings on March 15, will investigate all aspects of the presidential election and make findings and recommendations to improve future electoral processes.
Kriegler, 76, headed South Africa’s Independent Electoral Commission, which ran the country’s first democratic elections in 1994, and was instrumental in establishing the permanent electoral commission, which he chaired until 1999.
The committee will be a non-judicial body made up of recognised Kenyan and non-Kenyan electoral experts, who have the highest professional standing and personal integrity.
The Independent Review Committee was established following approval by the two negotiating teams during the mediation talks.
During discussion on Agenda Three, the parties explored the options of presidential vote re-tallying, recounting and immediate elections.
However, both teams concluded that the only viable solution to the crisis was a political settlement.
ODM had, during the deliberations at Serena Hotel, proposed the formation of an independent review committee on the disputed presidential elections, strengthening the independence of Parliament and the reconstitution of ECK.
The ODM Party leader, Mr Raila Odinga, has already forwarded names of his representatives to the Committee. They are Mrs Catherine Muyeka Mumma and Mr Francis Angila Aywa.
The committee will submit its report within three to six months, following which it will be made public within 14 days.
Kriegler practiced as an advocate in Johannesburg for 25 years before he became a provincial and thereafter appellate judge. He was appointed a judge of the Constitutional Court on its formation in 1994.
After leaving that court he held a two-year acting judicial appointment chiefly engaged in judicial education and the training of public prosecutors and practicing advocates.
Sunday, 02 March 2008
Commentary - Great lessons from our Tanzanian neighbours
Ref:http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=118057
Publication Date: 3/2/2008
Paul of Tarsus is a venerated writer and preacher of yore who successfully began a spiritual movement based on Greek philosophy. He used a very helpful image of human anatomy to bring his message home; a human being is made up of many parts but is one body.
Paul warned us that if one body part, say the eye or the hand, indulged in selfish efficiency and other separatist tendencies in the hope of outshining the other parts, it would bring dysfunction and ultimate death to the whole body.
Clearly, the Creator has made mankind in a way that those individuals and communities who perfect the wisdom of mutual existence will always get the best out of life.
As we envision unity in the current season, we should not be led to feel that we have exhausted the levels of connection.
OUR HOPE NEED NOT BE A HELPLESS prisoner to party and ethnic polarisations. Why? Because even when party, tribe and all else let us down, there is still the all-time common denominator – we all are human beings who are born, who feel pain and who die.
This is the ultimate level of connection; our humanity is our graphic equaliser.
When we appreciate that we are all human beings, new grounds of respect emerge and the right of everyone to be here becomes more easily visible.
The suppression of others because of their ethnicity, race or class clearly becomes criminal, and the possibility of sacrifice for the sake of the larger good becomes noble.
When our universal humanness becomes the focus of our thoughts, there is even a sense of pride and joy that is triggered by the existence of diversity; many cultures, one people. This spurs the desire to guard against deterioration into inhumanity.
From this larger perception of each other as one body with many parts, throwing tantrums on the basis of tribal and party orientations can only be left to the short-sighted.
A MORE HELPFUL SPIRIT IN THIS SEASON would be reconstructing our humanity as opposed to strengthening our tribes and parties.
Kenyans often make fun of Tanzanians over their habit of preceding their expressions or requests with the word naomba (I request or beseech).
Even when spending their own money, they still tell the shopkeeper, “Naomba uniuzie mkate” (I beseech you to sell me bread). This is in glaring contrast to the average Kenyan’s abrupt way of asking for the same item from a local shop, “Lete mkate” (Bring the bread).
If Tanzanians lend an item and come back for it, the language is still as polite, “Naomba kisu changu” (I beseech you to give me my knife).
Kenyans have jestingly been heard to say that even when Tanzanians want to start a fight, they will say, “Naomba nikuchape” (I beseech you to let me beat you)!
But could there be a great wisdom in this word naomba, and especially when it habitually but meaningfully precedes every expression? I believe so.
There is also a great possibility that it is this naomba practice has formed a naomba culture, which has in turn seen Tanzanians dwell in relative peace despite their ethnic, religious and financial differences. Tanzania has over 120 ethnic groups.
From this culture, Kenyans can adopt a practice that would be helpful to us especially in the reconstruction of relationships. We need to learn the naomba coexistence.
In this naomba coexistence are several virtuous elements. The first being that interaction with others begins with respect for others.
There is a trend in Kenyan culture where disrespect is the initial reaction to people of a different opinion, language, culture or creed. We seem to assume that we are superior to those who are not like us.
So, rather than seeking to understand others, we seek to undermine them and thus disrespect them.
Respect is often earned after elements of wealth or influence in society emerge and are found worthy.
This kind of judgment demeans the person and exalts the achievements. In the naomba culture, however, respect for other people is the kingpin of coexistence.
Secondly, an understanding of the value of cooperation is necessary. In this element, it is ingrained that an individual cannot exist without others. It goes against the prevalent thinking that persons and communities can make it on their own.
THIS MEANS THAT FOR THE FULLNESS of life, relationships with others must be built on genuinely favourable foundations.
Having many enemies is nothing to be proud of. Life is, at its core, wired for cooperation. Individualism and separatism will take us nowhere.
Where the cooperation environment is disturbed, then the process of its restoration must be handled with speed, intensity and truth. Cooperation based on deception is a lie.
The third virtuous element of the naomba culture is a ruling attitude of humility. The word naomba in a request makes it plain that humans are reliant on others. Our satisfaction is hinged then, on their generosity.
Sadly, Kenyans live in a society where humility is portrayed as weakness. A denial of genuine weakness ushers in false pride.
When communities or entities run on false pride, they end up being proud of things that they should, in reality, be ashamed of.
We should borrow a lot of from the naomba culture of our Tanzanian neighbours, especially in this season of reflection, reconciliation and reconstruction.
The writer is a Nairobi theologian and a religious minister.
Publication Date: 3/2/2008
Paul of Tarsus is a venerated writer and preacher of yore who successfully began a spiritual movement based on Greek philosophy. He used a very helpful image of human anatomy to bring his message home; a human being is made up of many parts but is one body.
Paul warned us that if one body part, say the eye or the hand, indulged in selfish efficiency and other separatist tendencies in the hope of outshining the other parts, it would bring dysfunction and ultimate death to the whole body.
Clearly, the Creator has made mankind in a way that those individuals and communities who perfect the wisdom of mutual existence will always get the best out of life.
As we envision unity in the current season, we should not be led to feel that we have exhausted the levels of connection.
OUR HOPE NEED NOT BE A HELPLESS prisoner to party and ethnic polarisations. Why? Because even when party, tribe and all else let us down, there is still the all-time common denominator – we all are human beings who are born, who feel pain and who die.
This is the ultimate level of connection; our humanity is our graphic equaliser.
When we appreciate that we are all human beings, new grounds of respect emerge and the right of everyone to be here becomes more easily visible.
The suppression of others because of their ethnicity, race or class clearly becomes criminal, and the possibility of sacrifice for the sake of the larger good becomes noble.
When our universal humanness becomes the focus of our thoughts, there is even a sense of pride and joy that is triggered by the existence of diversity; many cultures, one people. This spurs the desire to guard against deterioration into inhumanity.
From this larger perception of each other as one body with many parts, throwing tantrums on the basis of tribal and party orientations can only be left to the short-sighted.
A MORE HELPFUL SPIRIT IN THIS SEASON would be reconstructing our humanity as opposed to strengthening our tribes and parties.
Kenyans often make fun of Tanzanians over their habit of preceding their expressions or requests with the word naomba (I request or beseech).
Even when spending their own money, they still tell the shopkeeper, “Naomba uniuzie mkate” (I beseech you to sell me bread). This is in glaring contrast to the average Kenyan’s abrupt way of asking for the same item from a local shop, “Lete mkate” (Bring the bread).
If Tanzanians lend an item and come back for it, the language is still as polite, “Naomba kisu changu” (I beseech you to give me my knife).
Kenyans have jestingly been heard to say that even when Tanzanians want to start a fight, they will say, “Naomba nikuchape” (I beseech you to let me beat you)!
But could there be a great wisdom in this word naomba, and especially when it habitually but meaningfully precedes every expression? I believe so.
There is also a great possibility that it is this naomba practice has formed a naomba culture, which has in turn seen Tanzanians dwell in relative peace despite their ethnic, religious and financial differences. Tanzania has over 120 ethnic groups.
From this culture, Kenyans can adopt a practice that would be helpful to us especially in the reconstruction of relationships. We need to learn the naomba coexistence.
In this naomba coexistence are several virtuous elements. The first being that interaction with others begins with respect for others.
There is a trend in Kenyan culture where disrespect is the initial reaction to people of a different opinion, language, culture or creed. We seem to assume that we are superior to those who are not like us.
So, rather than seeking to understand others, we seek to undermine them and thus disrespect them.
Respect is often earned after elements of wealth or influence in society emerge and are found worthy.
This kind of judgment demeans the person and exalts the achievements. In the naomba culture, however, respect for other people is the kingpin of coexistence.
Secondly, an understanding of the value of cooperation is necessary. In this element, it is ingrained that an individual cannot exist without others. It goes against the prevalent thinking that persons and communities can make it on their own.
THIS MEANS THAT FOR THE FULLNESS of life, relationships with others must be built on genuinely favourable foundations.
Having many enemies is nothing to be proud of. Life is, at its core, wired for cooperation. Individualism and separatism will take us nowhere.
Where the cooperation environment is disturbed, then the process of its restoration must be handled with speed, intensity and truth. Cooperation based on deception is a lie.
The third virtuous element of the naomba culture is a ruling attitude of humility. The word naomba in a request makes it plain that humans are reliant on others. Our satisfaction is hinged then, on their generosity.
Sadly, Kenyans live in a society where humility is portrayed as weakness. A denial of genuine weakness ushers in false pride.
When communities or entities run on false pride, they end up being proud of things that they should, in reality, be ashamed of.
We should borrow a lot of from the naomba culture of our Tanzanian neighbours, especially in this season of reflection, reconciliation and reconstruction.
The writer is a Nairobi theologian and a religious minister.
Commentary (by Gitau Warigi) - Sunday View - Foreign interests constituted a major stake in the crisis talks
Ref:http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=118059
Story by GITAU WARIGI
Publication Date: 3/2/2008
Martin Griffiths, Kofi Annan’s political adviser, likens the deliberations that led to Thursday’s political agreement to what African elders of long ago used to hold under a tree.
Only this time the penultimate talks were not under some tree but in President Kibaki’s Harambee House office.
The point the aide wanted to emphasise was the African nature of the mediation, where there was Mr Annan and his two eminent colleagues - retired President Benjamin Mkapa and Graca Machel - who were joined in the end by President Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania. And all of this under the happy umbrella of the Africa Union, whose chairman President Kikwete currently is.
ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT PRESIDENT Kikwete’s last-minute intervention was critical. From the moment on Tuesday when Mr Annan threw up his arms and indicated there was a deadlock, it was clear he was desperate for a big gun like Mr Kikwete to join in to convince President Kibaki, especially, that an agreement was to the government’s and everybody’s interest.
Reports that Mr Annan planned to rope in other regional players, principally President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, could be credible but have not been verified.
Mr Griffiths, however, was telling only half the story. Much as the AU and more so the neighbouring countries’ input was pivotal, the unspoken truth is that it was the wider international community that forced the Kenyan leadership’s hand.
In this instance, we are talking of the United States and Britain, the latter conveniently hiding under the cover of the European Union.
This was a cover Britain had to take after some solo statements some of its officials made infuriated the Kenya Government to a degree that was frankly startling. The United States, facing no power inhibitions of the sort our former colonial power secretly harbours, was more outspoken.
The clearest marker that the US was not ready to countenance deadlock came the moment Mr Annan hinted of a stalemate.
Immediately, a statement was issued from Washington under the name of Ms Condoleezza Rice, who was at the time visiting the Far East, saying that her country would reassess the legitimacy of either of the two disputing parties (i.e. PNU and ODM) once it concluded who was to blame for the impasse.
It was a loaded threat, meaning the superpower would brand whoever it thought was to blame as some kind of outlaw, with all the negative consequences implied by that.
And, though the US was diplomatic at first in suggesting it was open-minded as to who she thought was to blame, there was no doubt whatsoever that the unusual warning was aimed directly at the government side.
It is important to note that throughout the post-election crisis, the US Government, even as it vociferously protested at the bungled elections, has never questioned the legitimacy of the present government or President Kibaki’s position as such.
That is in contrast with the somewhat incoherent positions taken by different British officials, including the High Commissioner, Mr Adam Wood.
The farthest the US had gone was to say that, as long as the crisis persisted, it was not going to be business-as-usual, a theme that was quickly imitated by the European Union. It was also the US which led the way in imposing visa restrictions on some targeted Kenyans, a theme that was again quickly taken up by the Europeans.
There is no question at all that the government was extraordinarily peeved at all this foreign interference.
The tone and texture of the involvement can indeed be queried, but for anybody to think it could have been fought or wished away is to engage in wishful thinking.
Indeed it is quite correct to paint Mr Annan as essentially the pointman for the international community, but that should be understood in the proper context that foreign interests constituted a major stake in the mediation talks. I am relieved like the average Kenyan as to the outcome on Thursday.
BUT I AWAIT TO SEE HOW THE NEW coalition will work in practice, more so if it will work as a coherent outfit that focuses on what Kenyans expect from government, or whether it will be a hydra with two heads operating at cross-purposes.
It is important to sign off by reminding our government something President Museveni said while recently addressing the East African Legislative Assembly. He said that the Kenyan crisis persisted because there was a problem of leadership. Mr Museveni has a history of being blunt but often very perceptive, and his bluntness is only possibly surpassed by that of Rwandan President Paul Kagame.
The latter’s reported remarks when violence was in full swing in Kenya remain well-documented, though Rwandan diplomats, much aware of their landlocked status, took the care to deny them.
Story by GITAU WARIGI
Publication Date: 3/2/2008
Martin Griffiths, Kofi Annan’s political adviser, likens the deliberations that led to Thursday’s political agreement to what African elders of long ago used to hold under a tree.
Only this time the penultimate talks were not under some tree but in President Kibaki’s Harambee House office.
The point the aide wanted to emphasise was the African nature of the mediation, where there was Mr Annan and his two eminent colleagues - retired President Benjamin Mkapa and Graca Machel - who were joined in the end by President Jakaya Kikwete of Tanzania. And all of this under the happy umbrella of the Africa Union, whose chairman President Kikwete currently is.
ALL INDICATIONS ARE THAT PRESIDENT Kikwete’s last-minute intervention was critical. From the moment on Tuesday when Mr Annan threw up his arms and indicated there was a deadlock, it was clear he was desperate for a big gun like Mr Kikwete to join in to convince President Kibaki, especially, that an agreement was to the government’s and everybody’s interest.
Reports that Mr Annan planned to rope in other regional players, principally President Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, could be credible but have not been verified.
Mr Griffiths, however, was telling only half the story. Much as the AU and more so the neighbouring countries’ input was pivotal, the unspoken truth is that it was the wider international community that forced the Kenyan leadership’s hand.
In this instance, we are talking of the United States and Britain, the latter conveniently hiding under the cover of the European Union.
This was a cover Britain had to take after some solo statements some of its officials made infuriated the Kenya Government to a degree that was frankly startling. The United States, facing no power inhibitions of the sort our former colonial power secretly harbours, was more outspoken.
The clearest marker that the US was not ready to countenance deadlock came the moment Mr Annan hinted of a stalemate.
Immediately, a statement was issued from Washington under the name of Ms Condoleezza Rice, who was at the time visiting the Far East, saying that her country would reassess the legitimacy of either of the two disputing parties (i.e. PNU and ODM) once it concluded who was to blame for the impasse.
It was a loaded threat, meaning the superpower would brand whoever it thought was to blame as some kind of outlaw, with all the negative consequences implied by that.
And, though the US was diplomatic at first in suggesting it was open-minded as to who she thought was to blame, there was no doubt whatsoever that the unusual warning was aimed directly at the government side.
It is important to note that throughout the post-election crisis, the US Government, even as it vociferously protested at the bungled elections, has never questioned the legitimacy of the present government or President Kibaki’s position as such.
That is in contrast with the somewhat incoherent positions taken by different British officials, including the High Commissioner, Mr Adam Wood.
The farthest the US had gone was to say that, as long as the crisis persisted, it was not going to be business-as-usual, a theme that was quickly imitated by the European Union. It was also the US which led the way in imposing visa restrictions on some targeted Kenyans, a theme that was again quickly taken up by the Europeans.
There is no question at all that the government was extraordinarily peeved at all this foreign interference.
The tone and texture of the involvement can indeed be queried, but for anybody to think it could have been fought or wished away is to engage in wishful thinking.
Indeed it is quite correct to paint Mr Annan as essentially the pointman for the international community, but that should be understood in the proper context that foreign interests constituted a major stake in the mediation talks. I am relieved like the average Kenyan as to the outcome on Thursday.
BUT I AWAIT TO SEE HOW THE NEW coalition will work in practice, more so if it will work as a coherent outfit that focuses on what Kenyans expect from government, or whether it will be a hydra with two heads operating at cross-purposes.
It is important to sign off by reminding our government something President Museveni said while recently addressing the East African Legislative Assembly. He said that the Kenyan crisis persisted because there was a problem of leadership. Mr Museveni has a history of being blunt but often very perceptive, and his bluntness is only possibly surpassed by that of Rwandan President Paul Kagame.
The latter’s reported remarks when violence was in full swing in Kenya remain well-documented, though Rwandan diplomats, much aware of their landlocked status, took the care to deny them.
Commentary (by Philip Ochieng) - Fifth Columnist - Taking forward Thursday's agreement
Ref:http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=118058
Story by PHILIP OCHIENG
Publication Date: 3/2/2008
What Kofi Annan has helped give us is only a stopgap measure. For, apparently, the crisis out of which the inimitable international functionary could help steer Kenya had only short-term ramifications.
If we implement the pact with thoroughness, we should soon get out of the abyss into which the incredible ineptitude of Samuel Kivuitu’s outfit plunged this country in December. But the indefatigable Ghanaian has repeatedly reminded us that the perceived ballot manipulations were a mere trigger.
The violence and imbroglio that reigned in January had been coming as inexorably as the sun sets in the Underworld. Langston Hughes, a former slave, asks in his poem “Harlem”: “What happens to a dream deferred?”
His answer: The unfulfilled dream may “sugar over” or “sag” and then “explode.” Foreseeing the Big Bang of the early 1970s, James Baldwin, another black American protest writer, called it The Fire Next Time.
AFRICA’S NATIONAL EXPLOSIONS – ESPECIALLY KENYA’S - have two related roots. The first are composed of certain cynical promises made by the nationalists at independence and repeated by their comprador successors at every election time.
The second are composed of direct crimes committed against the people by the comprador regimes – most of them sponsored by the former colonial powers to protect and perpetuate European exploitation of Africa’s resources as the people sink into abject poverty.
The neo-colonial agents – our ruling cliques - use their inordinate political powers to commit two kinds of crime. The first is the ferocity with which they grab wealth – especially land and cash – as the mass writhes in deepening material wretchedness.
The second is the clique’s contumacious refusal to overhaul the instrument – the constitution - through which the former colonial powers legitimise their siphoning off of the proceeds of our labour and natural resources to enrich Europe and North America and impoverish our people.
These factors have ensured that post-colonial Africa is composed only of what a critic has called “eggshell states.” For, although our rulers are extraordinarily powerful – because these individuals think only of their pockets and vigorously repress every form of protest – all these states sway for ever on a sand foundation. If they rest at all, it is on a powder keg.
The mass disillusionment with Uhuru is thus permanent. In The Reds and the Blacks, journalist William Attwood admits that he busily watered its roots when he was US ambassador to Jomo Kenyatta at independence.
He was thus in a good position to diagnose the damage it later caused in Kenya. As if apologising, he wrote in The Nation of Manhattan of March 20, 1982, that what was unfolding in Africa was a “...revolution of rising expectations...”
SCHOLAR EUGENE STALEY HAS WRITTEN: “POVERTY... hunger, disease, and lack of opportunity for self-development ... have been the lot of the ordinary people in the underdeveloped countries ... The new thing is that now this poverty has become a source of active political discontent...
“It is one of the most profoundly important political facts of the mid-20th century that among the people ? a ferment is at work which has already produced ? irresistible demands for a speeded-up pace of economic and social change.”
Harold Butler of the ILO has commented: “The consciousness of misery has been created by the growing realisation that it is not the inescapable lot of the poor and that chances of a better life now exist...
“The immemorial passivity and fatalism of the Orient are beginning to yield to the desire for higher standards of [life and to the] determination to acquire them ...” If these desires are not met, they will inevitably build up to the same revolutionary anger as has occasionally besieged the black American.
What insures the ruling clique is that the masses - because of their anger - do not know the real structure of these sources of their miseries. Why? Because of yet another sin of commission perpetrated by the ruling clique.
It deliberately sings tribal songs to play our ethnic communities against one another in order to seal their minds against all social comprehension, so that, at elections, the people are forced to support only the candidates of their tribes - even where a candidate is a known murderer, thief or rapist.
Thus – although the anger has long-standing economic and constitutional roots – whenever it is triggered by many a Samuel Kivuitu, it eggs the victims to rush for one another’s necks on the basis of tribe while the real culprits (of all tribes) enjoy their wealth padlocked in maximum security in their suburban homes.
Kofi Annan’s lesson is terse. Thursday’s treaty will solve nothing unless its implementation is part of a deliberate systematic attack on tribalism and its natural concomitants like land grabbing, bank looting and the flouting of election regulations and other institutions of good governance.
Story by PHILIP OCHIENG
Publication Date: 3/2/2008
What Kofi Annan has helped give us is only a stopgap measure. For, apparently, the crisis out of which the inimitable international functionary could help steer Kenya had only short-term ramifications.
If we implement the pact with thoroughness, we should soon get out of the abyss into which the incredible ineptitude of Samuel Kivuitu’s outfit plunged this country in December. But the indefatigable Ghanaian has repeatedly reminded us that the perceived ballot manipulations were a mere trigger.
The violence and imbroglio that reigned in January had been coming as inexorably as the sun sets in the Underworld. Langston Hughes, a former slave, asks in his poem “Harlem”: “What happens to a dream deferred?”
His answer: The unfulfilled dream may “sugar over” or “sag” and then “explode.” Foreseeing the Big Bang of the early 1970s, James Baldwin, another black American protest writer, called it The Fire Next Time.
AFRICA’S NATIONAL EXPLOSIONS – ESPECIALLY KENYA’S - have two related roots. The first are composed of certain cynical promises made by the nationalists at independence and repeated by their comprador successors at every election time.
The second are composed of direct crimes committed against the people by the comprador regimes – most of them sponsored by the former colonial powers to protect and perpetuate European exploitation of Africa’s resources as the people sink into abject poverty.
The neo-colonial agents – our ruling cliques - use their inordinate political powers to commit two kinds of crime. The first is the ferocity with which they grab wealth – especially land and cash – as the mass writhes in deepening material wretchedness.
The second is the clique’s contumacious refusal to overhaul the instrument – the constitution - through which the former colonial powers legitimise their siphoning off of the proceeds of our labour and natural resources to enrich Europe and North America and impoverish our people.
These factors have ensured that post-colonial Africa is composed only of what a critic has called “eggshell states.” For, although our rulers are extraordinarily powerful – because these individuals think only of their pockets and vigorously repress every form of protest – all these states sway for ever on a sand foundation. If they rest at all, it is on a powder keg.
The mass disillusionment with Uhuru is thus permanent. In The Reds and the Blacks, journalist William Attwood admits that he busily watered its roots when he was US ambassador to Jomo Kenyatta at independence.
He was thus in a good position to diagnose the damage it later caused in Kenya. As if apologising, he wrote in The Nation of Manhattan of March 20, 1982, that what was unfolding in Africa was a “...revolution of rising expectations...”
SCHOLAR EUGENE STALEY HAS WRITTEN: “POVERTY... hunger, disease, and lack of opportunity for self-development ... have been the lot of the ordinary people in the underdeveloped countries ... The new thing is that now this poverty has become a source of active political discontent...
“It is one of the most profoundly important political facts of the mid-20th century that among the people ? a ferment is at work which has already produced ? irresistible demands for a speeded-up pace of economic and social change.”
Harold Butler of the ILO has commented: “The consciousness of misery has been created by the growing realisation that it is not the inescapable lot of the poor and that chances of a better life now exist...
“The immemorial passivity and fatalism of the Orient are beginning to yield to the desire for higher standards of [life and to the] determination to acquire them ...” If these desires are not met, they will inevitably build up to the same revolutionary anger as has occasionally besieged the black American.
What insures the ruling clique is that the masses - because of their anger - do not know the real structure of these sources of their miseries. Why? Because of yet another sin of commission perpetrated by the ruling clique.
It deliberately sings tribal songs to play our ethnic communities against one another in order to seal their minds against all social comprehension, so that, at elections, the people are forced to support only the candidates of their tribes - even where a candidate is a known murderer, thief or rapist.
Thus – although the anger has long-standing economic and constitutional roots – whenever it is triggered by many a Samuel Kivuitu, it eggs the victims to rush for one another’s necks on the basis of tribe while the real culprits (of all tribes) enjoy their wealth padlocked in maximum security in their suburban homes.
Kofi Annan’s lesson is terse. Thursday’s treaty will solve nothing unless its implementation is part of a deliberate systematic attack on tribalism and its natural concomitants like land grabbing, bank looting and the flouting of election regulations and other institutions of good governance.
Commentary (by Ken Kamoche) - Critics of 'foreign interference' are selfish
Ref:http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=118060
Story by KEN KAMOCHE
Publication Date: 3/2/2008
My attention was drawn to a recent media report that former British Premier Tony Blair has been appointed a special adviser to the Paul Kagame’s government in Rwanda. Apparently, Mr Blair’s remit is to help the country’s economy recover from the aftermath of the 1990s genocide by attracting foreign investment.
This comes at a time when Kenya is hosting the Kofi Annan-led team of eminent personalities working to resolve the political stalemate in the country.
So, what happened to all that nonsense about foreigners interfering with so-called national sovereignty? Have African leaders suddenly realised there is nothing wrong with taking a bit of advice from beyond their borders?
Clearly not, if the intransigence of the Sudanese regime is anything to go by, or in fact in the case of Kenya itself, where bloated egos have become obstacle to peace.
One thing is clear. The population is waking up to the reality that criticisms of so-called foreign intervention are simply lame excuses by hard-line politicians hell-bent on saving their skins and protecting their political careers while painting the foreign diplomat or politician as a despicable bogeyman.
The constant warnings and invectives that emanate from ministers’ mouths telling off these bogeymen and reminding them that Kenya is no longer a colony are nauseating and ludicrous in the extreme.
Kenya might be an independent country, independent, that is from an ex-colonial power.
Unfortunately, we are by no means free of the plutocrat-kleptocrat regimes that replaced the colonial one. We should be even more wary of this home-grown type of maladministration which is able to sell itself as one of us, as our genuine spokesperson because it is racially - if not ethnically - at one with us.
French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu put forward an interesting concept which he termed ‘symbolic violence’. Nothing to do with violent mobs on the streets.
Power imbalances
If anything, the violence is so subtle you barely notice it because you play a part in approving it. Simply put, symbolic violence is the exercise of power upon a people with their complicit acceptance.
Sounds like democracy, doesn’t it? You cast your vote, put us into power, so, you agreed to our ruling you, right?
Trouble is, the mechanisms of social control are not always explicit. And more ominously, symbolic violence operates by denying while simultaneously reinforcing troublesome realities like power imbalances, and in our case, one would argue, ethnic tensions, and the political structures that keep people divided and economic classes, separated.
Because the ordinary man and woman is unable to participate in the corrupt economy that they see enriching the high and mighty, they nevertheless accept that corruption is the only way to overnight riches.
People see their leaders getting away with grand theft, arrogant talk, wanton ridicule of any outsiders who might be pointing out the emperor’s nakedness. Everyone assumes this is the national moral code.
They lend their complicity to the venal administration, and ultimately succumb to the domination that they themselves help legitimize. Bourdieu called this reconnaissance sans connaissance, meaning: recognition without knowledge.
Once we’ve succumbed to misrecognition we cannot turn round and say, ‘we won’t accept these outsiders’ criticism and help’. Because to do so would be to admit that we’ve been hoodwinked.
To accept Condoleezza Rice’s, Mr Annan’s or Desmond Tutu’s claims that a culture of impunity and corruption is destroying our nation is to accept we’ve all along been misguided in our choice of politics, and that our leaders are not the demi-gods we’ve made them out to be.
Mental colonialism by our own leaders is a hundred times more insidious than control by foreigners because it is like a cancer buried deep within the living tissue of the nation-state.
The cancer cannot be removed by a quick operation under local anaesthesia, or by chucking the governor and his henchmen back to their country.
It requires a new form of recognition: recognition with knowledge. We must, as a people begin to question whom our leaders are speaking for when they say ‘stay off our national affairs’.
Sovereignty is not synonymous with the political space in which rival parties scramble over ministerial appointments and other goodies. Though it is about independent rule and power as exercised by a government free of external interference, under no circumstances can it be used to justify the service of narrow factional interests that override the national good.
When people lose faith in their leaders’ ability to ensure peace and stability because the leaders are too busy fighting over power, when talks to resolve the current crisis threaten to degenerate into a circus, it should become clear to the leaders that this is no longer about them. It’s not about foreigners. It’s about Kenya’s future.
Professor Ken Kamoche is an academic and writer
Story by KEN KAMOCHE
Publication Date: 3/2/2008
My attention was drawn to a recent media report that former British Premier Tony Blair has been appointed a special adviser to the Paul Kagame’s government in Rwanda. Apparently, Mr Blair’s remit is to help the country’s economy recover from the aftermath of the 1990s genocide by attracting foreign investment.
This comes at a time when Kenya is hosting the Kofi Annan-led team of eminent personalities working to resolve the political stalemate in the country.
So, what happened to all that nonsense about foreigners interfering with so-called national sovereignty? Have African leaders suddenly realised there is nothing wrong with taking a bit of advice from beyond their borders?
Clearly not, if the intransigence of the Sudanese regime is anything to go by, or in fact in the case of Kenya itself, where bloated egos have become obstacle to peace.
One thing is clear. The population is waking up to the reality that criticisms of so-called foreign intervention are simply lame excuses by hard-line politicians hell-bent on saving their skins and protecting their political careers while painting the foreign diplomat or politician as a despicable bogeyman.
The constant warnings and invectives that emanate from ministers’ mouths telling off these bogeymen and reminding them that Kenya is no longer a colony are nauseating and ludicrous in the extreme.
Kenya might be an independent country, independent, that is from an ex-colonial power.
Unfortunately, we are by no means free of the plutocrat-kleptocrat regimes that replaced the colonial one. We should be even more wary of this home-grown type of maladministration which is able to sell itself as one of us, as our genuine spokesperson because it is racially - if not ethnically - at one with us.
French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu put forward an interesting concept which he termed ‘symbolic violence’. Nothing to do with violent mobs on the streets.
Power imbalances
If anything, the violence is so subtle you barely notice it because you play a part in approving it. Simply put, symbolic violence is the exercise of power upon a people with their complicit acceptance.
Sounds like democracy, doesn’t it? You cast your vote, put us into power, so, you agreed to our ruling you, right?
Trouble is, the mechanisms of social control are not always explicit. And more ominously, symbolic violence operates by denying while simultaneously reinforcing troublesome realities like power imbalances, and in our case, one would argue, ethnic tensions, and the political structures that keep people divided and economic classes, separated.
Because the ordinary man and woman is unable to participate in the corrupt economy that they see enriching the high and mighty, they nevertheless accept that corruption is the only way to overnight riches.
People see their leaders getting away with grand theft, arrogant talk, wanton ridicule of any outsiders who might be pointing out the emperor’s nakedness. Everyone assumes this is the national moral code.
They lend their complicity to the venal administration, and ultimately succumb to the domination that they themselves help legitimize. Bourdieu called this reconnaissance sans connaissance, meaning: recognition without knowledge.
Once we’ve succumbed to misrecognition we cannot turn round and say, ‘we won’t accept these outsiders’ criticism and help’. Because to do so would be to admit that we’ve been hoodwinked.
To accept Condoleezza Rice’s, Mr Annan’s or Desmond Tutu’s claims that a culture of impunity and corruption is destroying our nation is to accept we’ve all along been misguided in our choice of politics, and that our leaders are not the demi-gods we’ve made them out to be.
Mental colonialism by our own leaders is a hundred times more insidious than control by foreigners because it is like a cancer buried deep within the living tissue of the nation-state.
The cancer cannot be removed by a quick operation under local anaesthesia, or by chucking the governor and his henchmen back to their country.
It requires a new form of recognition: recognition with knowledge. We must, as a people begin to question whom our leaders are speaking for when they say ‘stay off our national affairs’.
Sovereignty is not synonymous with the political space in which rival parties scramble over ministerial appointments and other goodies. Though it is about independent rule and power as exercised by a government free of external interference, under no circumstances can it be used to justify the service of narrow factional interests that override the national good.
When people lose faith in their leaders’ ability to ensure peace and stability because the leaders are too busy fighting over power, when talks to resolve the current crisis threaten to degenerate into a circus, it should become clear to the leaders that this is no longer about them. It’s not about foreigners. It’s about Kenya’s future.
Professor Ken Kamoche is an academic and writer
Commentary (by X N Iraki) - This class has shared all except power
Ref: http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982624&cid=190
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
By XN Iraki
The current political elite has come from far together. Their endless political fights may be driven by the fact that they know each other too well, the same way marrying a girl from across the fence will earn you a little respect and a lot of contempt.
It is for no other reason that cross-cultural marriages earn the partners long life respect, they know too little about each other’s past and background.
Some mystery is good for marriage and even romance.
It has been boldly suggested that the Kenyan political elite have in the past shared everything else except power.
What has the Kenyan political elite shared in the past?
One, common history. Most saw the waning days of the colonialism but were not late in learning a few bad habits from them, including the class system. These elites are still fascinated by the former colonial ruler. Why else is ‘A’ level system still the system of choice for the political elites? Why else do most of them still consider it cool to take their children to British schools, when vast majority of Kenyans long shifted their allegiance to schools across the Atlantic?
The common history goes beyond using holed coins, and singing "God Save the Queen".
The defunct ‘A’ Level system gave Kenyan students unprecedented chance to mix and learn about each other. A Kikuyu boy could easily go to Shimo La Tewa High School while ‘A’ Masai girl could go to Karachuonyo High School. Former Speaker, Mr Francis ole Kaparo’s suggestion that all our schools should be classified as national need our support. When else will the next generation learn about each other?
Past experiences
The feeling of importance, some say contempt, exhibited by the Kenyan political elite has roots in their schooling and workplace; they went to schools when graduates were rare and revered while jobs were plenty.
They learnt the art of exclusion. The sharing went farther into businesses and professions, with some of the choicest enterprises, consultancies and professional practices jointly owned by a rich ethnic mix of Kenyans. Elite suburbs and clubs are a rich mix of Kenyan ethnic groups spiced with other nationalities.
The sharing went even deeper. They even shared their hearts. The intermarriage among the Kenyan political elite is ethnically blind. This information is often not available to the public. It only becomes available in newspaper obituary pages.
With such a rich history of sharing, including sharing of the hearts, one may loudly wonder why the political elite find it hard to share power. They may have learnt not to share power from our former rulers, where a family rules through generations, unchallenged. Having grown up unchallenged in school and workplace may have solidified their belief in self against institutions. Further, sharing power among equals is not popular.
But more poignantly, the political elite may be in a hurry to get life’s last ultimate prize, a chance to control others and make a final mark before the journey to their sunset starts.
After all, Kenya is not good in recognising heroes beyond political arena. One foreigner asked me why Nobel laureate Prof Wangari Maathai was missing from the mediation talks.
The political elite has achieved some of their choicest dreams in life. Their urge to power is more psychic, an addiction, some say a race against time.
Some have loudly wondered why Kofi Annan’s hair is grey yet Kenyans in his company had black hair; the Kenyans were either his age mates or older.
Will the deal last? Yes, if the political elites share power the way they have shared other resources.
Like marriage, nothing matters more than trust. The Tanzanian president reminded us. No matter how colourful a wedding is, no matter how many layers a cake has, it is trust that determines its success. Kenyan political elites have signed the deal, just as we sign marriage contracts. The hard task is implementing the contracts.
—The writer is a lecturer at the University of Nairobi, School of Business: xniraki@aol.com
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
By XN Iraki
The current political elite has come from far together. Their endless political fights may be driven by the fact that they know each other too well, the same way marrying a girl from across the fence will earn you a little respect and a lot of contempt.
It is for no other reason that cross-cultural marriages earn the partners long life respect, they know too little about each other’s past and background.
Some mystery is good for marriage and even romance.
It has been boldly suggested that the Kenyan political elite have in the past shared everything else except power.
What has the Kenyan political elite shared in the past?
One, common history. Most saw the waning days of the colonialism but were not late in learning a few bad habits from them, including the class system. These elites are still fascinated by the former colonial ruler. Why else is ‘A’ level system still the system of choice for the political elites? Why else do most of them still consider it cool to take their children to British schools, when vast majority of Kenyans long shifted their allegiance to schools across the Atlantic?
The common history goes beyond using holed coins, and singing "God Save the Queen".
The defunct ‘A’ Level system gave Kenyan students unprecedented chance to mix and learn about each other. A Kikuyu boy could easily go to Shimo La Tewa High School while ‘A’ Masai girl could go to Karachuonyo High School. Former Speaker, Mr Francis ole Kaparo’s suggestion that all our schools should be classified as national need our support. When else will the next generation learn about each other?
Past experiences
The feeling of importance, some say contempt, exhibited by the Kenyan political elite has roots in their schooling and workplace; they went to schools when graduates were rare and revered while jobs were plenty.
They learnt the art of exclusion. The sharing went farther into businesses and professions, with some of the choicest enterprises, consultancies and professional practices jointly owned by a rich ethnic mix of Kenyans. Elite suburbs and clubs are a rich mix of Kenyan ethnic groups spiced with other nationalities.
The sharing went even deeper. They even shared their hearts. The intermarriage among the Kenyan political elite is ethnically blind. This information is often not available to the public. It only becomes available in newspaper obituary pages.
With such a rich history of sharing, including sharing of the hearts, one may loudly wonder why the political elite find it hard to share power. They may have learnt not to share power from our former rulers, where a family rules through generations, unchallenged. Having grown up unchallenged in school and workplace may have solidified their belief in self against institutions. Further, sharing power among equals is not popular.
But more poignantly, the political elite may be in a hurry to get life’s last ultimate prize, a chance to control others and make a final mark before the journey to their sunset starts.
After all, Kenya is not good in recognising heroes beyond political arena. One foreigner asked me why Nobel laureate Prof Wangari Maathai was missing from the mediation talks.
The political elite has achieved some of their choicest dreams in life. Their urge to power is more psychic, an addiction, some say a race against time.
Some have loudly wondered why Kofi Annan’s hair is grey yet Kenyans in his company had black hair; the Kenyans were either his age mates or older.
Will the deal last? Yes, if the political elites share power the way they have shared other resources.
Like marriage, nothing matters more than trust. The Tanzanian president reminded us. No matter how colourful a wedding is, no matter how many layers a cake has, it is trust that determines its success. Kenyan political elites have signed the deal, just as we sign marriage contracts. The hard task is implementing the contracts.
—The writer is a lecturer at the University of Nairobi, School of Business: xniraki@aol.com
Commentary (by Abdulahi Ahmednasir) - Raila’s ultimate test as it’s now time to walk the talk
Ref: http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982622&cid=190
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
By Abdulahi Ahmednasir
The agreement on Thursday between President Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga to share power is historical.
The substratum of the agreement is that Raila will have the authority to appoint half the Cabinet. This is the first time in the country’s history that two leaders, who probably loathe one another, jointly exercise executive power. We have begun a cohabitation arrangement between two unloving partners. But who said partners in a relationship must be crazy about each other?
This arrangement provides an opportunity for Kenyans to compare and contrast the people the two leaders pick for the Cabinet.
Among the things Kenyans will look at are qualifications, age and gender balance.
They will also want to see who appoints a ‘clean’ and ethnically balanced Cabinet.
For his entire political life, Raila has fought to reform Government through fair and foul means.
He endlessly fought for a limited liberal and accountable Government. He fought against corruption and tribalism. He has championed the rights of the weak, the marginalised and the powerless. He has also been a political prisoner.
Undoubtedly, Raila has a long illustrious political career as a rebel. For the last 25 years, he has been fighting a Government in power either from the streets or in Cabinet.
He was rarely comfortable with any regime, including those he served as minister.
The power deal will therefore take Raila to hitherto uncharted waters. The ministers he appoints will be revealing in four important ways.
First, through his appointees, Kenyans will know whether Raila is merely a smooth talking wily politician who tells the masses what they want to hear. They will also want to know whether he genuinely believes in the principles he has championed for three decades.
Second, will he, like Kibaki and Moi, appoint ministers to reward them for loyalty, or will he tap into the huge potential his party provides? This is important because we will know whether Raila will conduct business as usual or will break from the past.
Third, he is one of the few politicians free from allegation or complicity in grand corruption. On the few occasions he was in Government, he ran ‘clean’ ministries and has a proud record against graft.
One of the effective tools he used against Moi and Kibaki in past campaigns was to show Kenyans how enmeshed both administrations were in grand corruption. He has talked the talk. The time to walk the talk has come.
Chance to stand up and be counted
Many ODM MPs have good credentials and a clean record. Will Raila show by deeds that his portion of Cabinet — to quote former British Prime Minister Tony Blair — will be free of sleaze and whiter than white? Or will he reward influential individuals, even those accused of involvement in graft?
Four, through his choice of Cabinet, he will show both his game plan in the coalition and his strategy for another bid at the presidency.
Undoubtedly, Raila’s choice of Cabinet will force him out of the closet to stand up and be counted.
So how will he fare? Raila is both a pragmatic and a conviction politician. He will not forget the core base of his support, but if pragmatism and conviction clash, he would probably stick to his conviction. He recently said he would join a coalition government only if it had a huge reform agenda. Politicians like Mr James Orengo and Prof Anyang’ Nyong’o have been in the reform trenches with him all along. Like him, they have a track record for reform, the fight against graft and a limited and accountable government.
Raila’s next steps will tell Kenyans whether his reform rhetoric was just that or a rue conviction for change.
Raila, in his appointments, will loudly tell Kenyans whether, like Kibaki, he loathes younthful talent or treasures them. Will he be brave enough to appoint men and women in their 30s and 40s or will he find more comfort in those age groups he looks up to as uncles?
ODM has also more than its share of MPs who served under Moi in various capacities. This group proved invaluable to Raila’s efforts in the elections. But some have heavy baggage. In a clean administration, they would be untouchable political lepers. Will Raila play real politic or seek refuge in beliefs and principles?
During campaigns, Raila pledged to form a ministry that will deal with the torturous history of North Eastern Kenya. Now that he has the power to appoint a minister for such portfolio will he keep his pledge? And Muslims…
A second Prime Minister in independent Kenya, with authority to appoint half of the Cabinet, gives Kenyans the first opportunity to interrogate the enigma called Raila.
—The writer (ahmednasir@ahmedabdi.com) is a lawyer and former Law Society of Kenya chairman.
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
By Abdulahi Ahmednasir
The agreement on Thursday between President Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga to share power is historical.
The substratum of the agreement is that Raila will have the authority to appoint half the Cabinet. This is the first time in the country’s history that two leaders, who probably loathe one another, jointly exercise executive power. We have begun a cohabitation arrangement between two unloving partners. But who said partners in a relationship must be crazy about each other?
This arrangement provides an opportunity for Kenyans to compare and contrast the people the two leaders pick for the Cabinet.
Among the things Kenyans will look at are qualifications, age and gender balance.
They will also want to see who appoints a ‘clean’ and ethnically balanced Cabinet.
For his entire political life, Raila has fought to reform Government through fair and foul means.
He endlessly fought for a limited liberal and accountable Government. He fought against corruption and tribalism. He has championed the rights of the weak, the marginalised and the powerless. He has also been a political prisoner.
Undoubtedly, Raila has a long illustrious political career as a rebel. For the last 25 years, he has been fighting a Government in power either from the streets or in Cabinet.
He was rarely comfortable with any regime, including those he served as minister.
The power deal will therefore take Raila to hitherto uncharted waters. The ministers he appoints will be revealing in four important ways.
First, through his appointees, Kenyans will know whether Raila is merely a smooth talking wily politician who tells the masses what they want to hear. They will also want to know whether he genuinely believes in the principles he has championed for three decades.
Second, will he, like Kibaki and Moi, appoint ministers to reward them for loyalty, or will he tap into the huge potential his party provides? This is important because we will know whether Raila will conduct business as usual or will break from the past.
Third, he is one of the few politicians free from allegation or complicity in grand corruption. On the few occasions he was in Government, he ran ‘clean’ ministries and has a proud record against graft.
One of the effective tools he used against Moi and Kibaki in past campaigns was to show Kenyans how enmeshed both administrations were in grand corruption. He has talked the talk. The time to walk the talk has come.
Chance to stand up and be counted
Many ODM MPs have good credentials and a clean record. Will Raila show by deeds that his portion of Cabinet — to quote former British Prime Minister Tony Blair — will be free of sleaze and whiter than white? Or will he reward influential individuals, even those accused of involvement in graft?
Four, through his choice of Cabinet, he will show both his game plan in the coalition and his strategy for another bid at the presidency.
Undoubtedly, Raila’s choice of Cabinet will force him out of the closet to stand up and be counted.
So how will he fare? Raila is both a pragmatic and a conviction politician. He will not forget the core base of his support, but if pragmatism and conviction clash, he would probably stick to his conviction. He recently said he would join a coalition government only if it had a huge reform agenda. Politicians like Mr James Orengo and Prof Anyang’ Nyong’o have been in the reform trenches with him all along. Like him, they have a track record for reform, the fight against graft and a limited and accountable government.
Raila’s next steps will tell Kenyans whether his reform rhetoric was just that or a rue conviction for change.
Raila, in his appointments, will loudly tell Kenyans whether, like Kibaki, he loathes younthful talent or treasures them. Will he be brave enough to appoint men and women in their 30s and 40s or will he find more comfort in those age groups he looks up to as uncles?
ODM has also more than its share of MPs who served under Moi in various capacities. This group proved invaluable to Raila’s efforts in the elections. But some have heavy baggage. In a clean administration, they would be untouchable political lepers. Will Raila play real politic or seek refuge in beliefs and principles?
During campaigns, Raila pledged to form a ministry that will deal with the torturous history of North Eastern Kenya. Now that he has the power to appoint a minister for such portfolio will he keep his pledge? And Muslims…
A second Prime Minister in independent Kenya, with authority to appoint half of the Cabinet, gives Kenyans the first opportunity to interrogate the enigma called Raila.
—The writer (ahmednasir@ahmedabdi.com) is a lawyer and former Law Society of Kenya chairman.
Commentary (by Standard Editorial team) - No retreat, no surrender for President and Raila
Ref: http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982631&cid=16
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
The task of rebuilding the nation and restoring the broken bonds of trust and faith among the citizenry is gargantuan.
The burden of recovering the missed steps in democracy, a process jolted by the sham that was last year’s presidential election, is backbreaking.
The brief to give Kenya a new comprehensive constitution addressing the historical injustices, past cases of impunity, pursuing national healing and peace and justice is onerous.
The responsibility of securing the nation under the umbrella of truth, peace, justice and reconciliation commission can be suffocating. So, too, is the assignment and duty to undertake and complete, appropriate constitutional, legal and institutional reforms for achieving the complete independence of the Judiciary, Parliament, the Electoral Commission, and other constitutional offices.
There is also the awesome task of resettling the displaced, the thousands in tented camps in public utilities. The point is there is too much to be done and in so little a time. The onerous task before the scarred nation and the leadership is captured by the draft of the proposed National Accord and Reconciliation Act 2008.
The document that could haul Kenya from the cesspit of failed and ruinous regimes, is to be tabled in Parliament for debate and possible adoption after its state opening on Thursday.
All these tasks stem from the agreement signed by President Kibaki and Orange Democratic Movement leader Mr Raila Odinga, under the watchful eye of the world, through the lead mediator Dr Kofi Annan.
It, therefore, follows that President Kibaki and Raila are key to its success. Much will depend on the level of goodwill they will invest in the process, and how successful they will be in whipping to line their supporters, especially Members of Parliament.
The fact remains that no matter the perception in character and political disposition, that they are like a concoction of oil and water, the burden of salvaging the nation and attaining the dreams of the Founding Fathers are now squarely on their shoulders. Historians are waiting on the wings, to record, for posterity, how the two, navigated the tricky waters of personal and political interests. As we have said before, the two must rise to the occasion in the name and spirit of the motherland.
Sacrifices and goodwill
The scope of the work, and the manner of achieving success requires their individual sacrifices and goodwill. For it is not about them, the servants of the people, but the survival and resilience of the motherland.
That Kenya was, until the signing of the power sharing agreement by Kibaki and Raila, on the precipice is incontestable. So much has been written about how militia groups, patterned along ethnic lines, were gearing up for war if the Annan talks collapsed.
The reality of the nation is that it was not just one or two communities waiting on the wings to go for each other hammers and tongs. It does not therefore mean we are out of the woods, for a lot more will depend on how Kibaki and Raila will, in the spirit of give and take, share power and garland the nation with unity, tolerance and accommodation.
The first stanza of our National Anthem is after all a prayer to the Almighty:
"O God of all creation,
Bless this our land and nation.
Justice be our shield and defender,
May we dwell in unity,
Peace and liberty.
Plenty be found within our borders."
Both leaders must be guided by the popular ethos: "The difference is that a statesman thinks he belongs to the State, and a politician thinks the State belongs to him."
Kenyans expect that the two will work together, amicably and without retreat or surrender.
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
The task of rebuilding the nation and restoring the broken bonds of trust and faith among the citizenry is gargantuan.
The burden of recovering the missed steps in democracy, a process jolted by the sham that was last year’s presidential election, is backbreaking.
The brief to give Kenya a new comprehensive constitution addressing the historical injustices, past cases of impunity, pursuing national healing and peace and justice is onerous.
The responsibility of securing the nation under the umbrella of truth, peace, justice and reconciliation commission can be suffocating. So, too, is the assignment and duty to undertake and complete, appropriate constitutional, legal and institutional reforms for achieving the complete independence of the Judiciary, Parliament, the Electoral Commission, and other constitutional offices.
There is also the awesome task of resettling the displaced, the thousands in tented camps in public utilities. The point is there is too much to be done and in so little a time. The onerous task before the scarred nation and the leadership is captured by the draft of the proposed National Accord and Reconciliation Act 2008.
The document that could haul Kenya from the cesspit of failed and ruinous regimes, is to be tabled in Parliament for debate and possible adoption after its state opening on Thursday.
All these tasks stem from the agreement signed by President Kibaki and Orange Democratic Movement leader Mr Raila Odinga, under the watchful eye of the world, through the lead mediator Dr Kofi Annan.
It, therefore, follows that President Kibaki and Raila are key to its success. Much will depend on the level of goodwill they will invest in the process, and how successful they will be in whipping to line their supporters, especially Members of Parliament.
The fact remains that no matter the perception in character and political disposition, that they are like a concoction of oil and water, the burden of salvaging the nation and attaining the dreams of the Founding Fathers are now squarely on their shoulders. Historians are waiting on the wings, to record, for posterity, how the two, navigated the tricky waters of personal and political interests. As we have said before, the two must rise to the occasion in the name and spirit of the motherland.
Sacrifices and goodwill
The scope of the work, and the manner of achieving success requires their individual sacrifices and goodwill. For it is not about them, the servants of the people, but the survival and resilience of the motherland.
That Kenya was, until the signing of the power sharing agreement by Kibaki and Raila, on the precipice is incontestable. So much has been written about how militia groups, patterned along ethnic lines, were gearing up for war if the Annan talks collapsed.
The reality of the nation is that it was not just one or two communities waiting on the wings to go for each other hammers and tongs. It does not therefore mean we are out of the woods, for a lot more will depend on how Kibaki and Raila will, in the spirit of give and take, share power and garland the nation with unity, tolerance and accommodation.
The first stanza of our National Anthem is after all a prayer to the Almighty:
"O God of all creation,
Bless this our land and nation.
Justice be our shield and defender,
May we dwell in unity,
Peace and liberty.
Plenty be found within our borders."
Both leaders must be guided by the popular ethos: "The difference is that a statesman thinks he belongs to the State, and a politician thinks the State belongs to him."
Kenyans expect that the two will work together, amicably and without retreat or surrender.
Commentary (By Maseme Machuka) - Power sharing deal unites the nation in celebrations
Ref:http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982660&cid=259
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
By Maseme Machuka
There were celebrations across the country immediately President Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga signed a power-sharing pact.
Indeed, it was a sigh of relief when the two principal protagonists finally bowed to pressure and appended their signatures to an accord dubbed "Acting Together For Kenya-Agreement on the Principles of Partnerships of the Coalition Government."
Many Kenyans had feared that there could be outbreak of renewed violence when peace talks were suspended last Monday. There is fresh hope after the two rival leaders agreed to share power.
They both gave ground under massive international pressure and the intervention of African Union Chairman and Tanzanian President Mr Jakaya Kikwete.
The two unveiled a deal that is intended to steer the country towards reconciliation following the recent skirmishes.
Annan was, however, quick to add that the "The journey is far from over. In fact it is only beginning."
He said political will was paramount for full realisation of the deal tenets.
Kenyans reacted with joy and happiness throughout the country. Business executives and world leaders hailed Kibaki and Raila.
After the Monday event — where Annan said he was disappointed at the way things were going at the negotiation table — the country went into a moment of heightened disquiet.
Many spoke in hushed tones about the aftermath of the post-election violence and possible resurgence of chaos.
Earlier, the US sent a terse message to the two leaders, asking them to expedite peace process or face consequences.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Dr Rice said it would not be business as usual if the hardliners continue to hold their ground.
"I want to emphasise that the future of our relationship with both sides and their legitimacy hinges on their cooperation to achieve this political solution. In that regard, we are exploring a wide range of possible actions," she said.
She then warned: "We will draw our own conclusions about who is responsible for lack of progress and take necessary steps. We will also exert leadership with the United Nations, the African Union, the European Union, and others to ensure that the political solution the Kenyan people deserve is achieved." Annan said the negotiating teams could not make key decisions on power sharing.
He said it was up to Kibaki and Raila to bring the crisis to its logical conclusion.
He then chose to engage the principals to end the crisis.
Before the deal, the country was thrown into confusion. Businesspeople feared of reemergence of violence and shut their premises.
The sporadic celebrations that saluted the evening of the deal brought life to a country that has been in limbo for over a month.
A new dawn was witnessed and people greeted the news with jubilation. Many of them said it was the dawn of a new year.
The feeling of being Kenyan and the spirit of oneness was once again ignited.
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
By Maseme Machuka
There were celebrations across the country immediately President Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga signed a power-sharing pact.
Indeed, it was a sigh of relief when the two principal protagonists finally bowed to pressure and appended their signatures to an accord dubbed "Acting Together For Kenya-Agreement on the Principles of Partnerships of the Coalition Government."
Many Kenyans had feared that there could be outbreak of renewed violence when peace talks were suspended last Monday. There is fresh hope after the two rival leaders agreed to share power.
They both gave ground under massive international pressure and the intervention of African Union Chairman and Tanzanian President Mr Jakaya Kikwete.
The two unveiled a deal that is intended to steer the country towards reconciliation following the recent skirmishes.
Annan was, however, quick to add that the "The journey is far from over. In fact it is only beginning."
He said political will was paramount for full realisation of the deal tenets.
Kenyans reacted with joy and happiness throughout the country. Business executives and world leaders hailed Kibaki and Raila.
After the Monday event — where Annan said he was disappointed at the way things were going at the negotiation table — the country went into a moment of heightened disquiet.
Many spoke in hushed tones about the aftermath of the post-election violence and possible resurgence of chaos.
Earlier, the US sent a terse message to the two leaders, asking them to expedite peace process or face consequences.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Dr Rice said it would not be business as usual if the hardliners continue to hold their ground.
"I want to emphasise that the future of our relationship with both sides and their legitimacy hinges on their cooperation to achieve this political solution. In that regard, we are exploring a wide range of possible actions," she said.
She then warned: "We will draw our own conclusions about who is responsible for lack of progress and take necessary steps. We will also exert leadership with the United Nations, the African Union, the European Union, and others to ensure that the political solution the Kenyan people deserve is achieved." Annan said the negotiating teams could not make key decisions on power sharing.
He said it was up to Kibaki and Raila to bring the crisis to its logical conclusion.
He then chose to engage the principals to end the crisis.
Before the deal, the country was thrown into confusion. Businesspeople feared of reemergence of violence and shut their premises.
The sporadic celebrations that saluted the evening of the deal brought life to a country that has been in limbo for over a month.
A new dawn was witnessed and people greeted the news with jubilation. Many of them said it was the dawn of a new year.
The feeling of being Kenyan and the spirit of oneness was once again ignited.
Commentary (by Standard Editorial team) - No retreat, no surrender for President and Raila
Ref:http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982631&cid=16
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
The task of rebuilding the nation and restoring the broken bonds of trust and faith among the citizenry is gargantuan.
The burden of recovering the missed steps in democracy, a process jolted by the sham that was last year’s presidential election, is backbreaking.
The brief to give Kenya a new comprehensive constitution addressing the historical injustices, past cases of impunity, pursuing national healing and peace and justice is onerous.
The responsibility of securing the nation under the umbrella of truth, peace, justice and reconciliation commission can be suffocating. So, too, is the assignment and duty to undertake and complete, appropriate constitutional, legal and institutional reforms for achieving the complete independence of the Judiciary, Parliament, the Electoral Commission, and other constitutional offices.
There is also the awesome task of resettling the displaced, the thousands in tented camps in public utilities. The point is there is too much to be done and in so little a time. The onerous task before the scarred nation and the leadership is captured by the draft of the proposed National Accord and Reconciliation Act 2008.
The document that could haul Kenya from the cesspit of failed and ruinous regimes, is to be tabled in Parliament for debate and possible adoption after its state opening on Thursday.
All these tasks stem from the agreement signed by President Kibaki and Orange Democratic Movement leader Mr Raila Odinga, under the watchful eye of the world, through the lead mediator Dr Kofi Annan.
It, therefore, follows that President Kibaki and Raila are key to its success. Much will depend on the level of goodwill they will invest in the process, and how successful they will be in whipping to line their supporters, especially Members of Parliament.
The fact remains that no matter the perception in character and political disposition, that they are like a concoction of oil and water, the burden of salvaging the nation and attaining the dreams of the Founding Fathers are now squarely on their shoulders. Historians are waiting on the wings, to record, for posterity, how the two, navigated the tricky waters of personal and political interests. As we have said before, the two must rise to the occasion in the name and spirit of the motherland.
Sacrifices and goodwill
The scope of the work, and the manner of achieving success requires their individual sacrifices and goodwill. For it is not about them, the servants of the people, but the survival and resilience of the motherland.
That Kenya was, until the signing of the power sharing agreement by Kibaki and Raila, on the precipice is incontestable. So much has been written about how militia groups, patterned along ethnic lines, were gearing up for war if the Annan talks collapsed.
The reality of the nation is that it was not just one or two communities waiting on the wings to go for each other hammers and tongs. It does not therefore mean we are out of the woods, for a lot more will depend on how Kibaki and Raila will, in the spirit of give and take, share power and garland the nation with unity, tolerance and accommodation.
The first stanza of our National Anthem is after all a prayer to the Almighty:
"O God of all creation,
Bless this our land and nation.
Justice be our shield and defender,
May we dwell in unity,
Peace and liberty.
Plenty be found within our borders."
Both leaders must be guided by the popular ethos: "The difference is that a statesman thinks he belongs to the State, and a politician thinks the State belongs to him."
Kenyans expect that the two will work together, amicably and without retreat or surrender.
Published on March 2, 2008, 12:00 am
The task of rebuilding the nation and restoring the broken bonds of trust and faith among the citizenry is gargantuan.
The burden of recovering the missed steps in democracy, a process jolted by the sham that was last year’s presidential election, is backbreaking.
The brief to give Kenya a new comprehensive constitution addressing the historical injustices, past cases of impunity, pursuing national healing and peace and justice is onerous.
The responsibility of securing the nation under the umbrella of truth, peace, justice and reconciliation commission can be suffocating. So, too, is the assignment and duty to undertake and complete, appropriate constitutional, legal and institutional reforms for achieving the complete independence of the Judiciary, Parliament, the Electoral Commission, and other constitutional offices.
There is also the awesome task of resettling the displaced, the thousands in tented camps in public utilities. The point is there is too much to be done and in so little a time. The onerous task before the scarred nation and the leadership is captured by the draft of the proposed National Accord and Reconciliation Act 2008.
The document that could haul Kenya from the cesspit of failed and ruinous regimes, is to be tabled in Parliament for debate and possible adoption after its state opening on Thursday.
All these tasks stem from the agreement signed by President Kibaki and Orange Democratic Movement leader Mr Raila Odinga, under the watchful eye of the world, through the lead mediator Dr Kofi Annan.
It, therefore, follows that President Kibaki and Raila are key to its success. Much will depend on the level of goodwill they will invest in the process, and how successful they will be in whipping to line their supporters, especially Members of Parliament.
The fact remains that no matter the perception in character and political disposition, that they are like a concoction of oil and water, the burden of salvaging the nation and attaining the dreams of the Founding Fathers are now squarely on their shoulders. Historians are waiting on the wings, to record, for posterity, how the two, navigated the tricky waters of personal and political interests. As we have said before, the two must rise to the occasion in the name and spirit of the motherland.
Sacrifices and goodwill
The scope of the work, and the manner of achieving success requires their individual sacrifices and goodwill. For it is not about them, the servants of the people, but the survival and resilience of the motherland.
That Kenya was, until the signing of the power sharing agreement by Kibaki and Raila, on the precipice is incontestable. So much has been written about how militia groups, patterned along ethnic lines, were gearing up for war if the Annan talks collapsed.
The reality of the nation is that it was not just one or two communities waiting on the wings to go for each other hammers and tongs. It does not therefore mean we are out of the woods, for a lot more will depend on how Kibaki and Raila will, in the spirit of give and take, share power and garland the nation with unity, tolerance and accommodation.
The first stanza of our National Anthem is after all a prayer to the Almighty:
"O God of all creation,
Bless this our land and nation.
Justice be our shield and defender,
May we dwell in unity,
Peace and liberty.
Plenty be found within our borders."
Both leaders must be guided by the popular ethos: "The difference is that a statesman thinks he belongs to the State, and a politician thinks the State belongs to him."
Kenyans expect that the two will work together, amicably and without retreat or surrender.
Saturday, 01 March 2008
Commentary (by Peter Mwaura) - Fair Play - Lessons to learn from Nigeria presidential election row
Ref:http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=117968
Story by PETER MWAURA
Publication Date: 3/1/2008
On Tuesday, a Nigerian court ruled that President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua was “validly elected as president”.
The judgment, good or bad, was a watershed in the West African country’s modern history, showing that the rule of law and constitutionalism have taken root in Africa’s most populous democracy.
Even more remarkable is the contrast with Kenya.
While the accusations of rigging and fraud in Nigeria’s poll in April 2007 and Kenya’s of December 2007 are strikingly similar, the routes taken by the aggrieved parties are markedly different.
The Nigerian poll, like Kenya’s, was condemned by international observers as flawed. Indeed, it was said that President Olusegun Obasanjo, who had served his maximum term and was not eligible for re-election, had manipulated the poll to favour Mr Yar’Adua, his preferred successor.
The contrast with Kenya, however, is somewhat dimmed by the differences in the winning margin.
In the Kenyan poll, the margin was thin, with President Kibaki credited with just over 230,000 votes over his nearest competitor, Mr Raila Odinga.
In the Nigerian poll, the margin was big, with President Yar’Adua winning with more than 70 per cent of the vote, compared to 18 per cent of Mr Muhammadu Buhari, a former military ruler, and seven per cent of former vice-president Atiku Abubakar.
The two filed a petition with the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal, arguing that Mr Yar’Adua and Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission had rigged the election which, they argued, should be nullified and a re-run ordered.
They did not claim, as Mr Odinga did in Kenya, that they had actually won the election.
All the same, Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar asked their supporters to remain calm as they sought court justice. But they made it clear that they respected the rule of law and the Judiciary.
Consequently, there were no riots, no demonstrations, no burning and no killing. In contrast, the story in Kenya is all too familiar the world over: the aggrieved politicians and their supporters took to the streets, declaring they had no confidence in Kenya’s judicial system, and anarchy followed.
This scenario sounds almost like a reversal of the stereotypes we entertain about ourselves and West Africans, Nigerians in particular.
Constitutional rule was only re-established in Nigeria in 1999 – more than 30 years after Kenya became independent - following decades of military rule.
Nigeria also gave us Biafra (1967-1970), the first civil war in independent Africa, fought over the demand for secession by a tribe inhabiting the south-east of the country — the Ibos — who were also singled out for ethnic cleansing.
It is also the country where rebels, in the Niger Delta, abduct foreign oil workers with impunity.
We also like to think of Nigerians in general as unruly, loud and cocky and Kenyans as more subdued and law-abiding.
At the same time, Kenya and Nigeria share a system of justice – the common law — and electoral laws.
In Nigeria, as in Kenya, electoral petitions take an unduly long time to determine. Both Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar had to wait for almost a year for the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal to determine their petition.
It is perhaps because of such frustrating delays that Mr Odinga must have decided that Kenyan courts were not the route to take to seek a remedy for his electoral grievances.
In Nigeria, the case of Mr Peter Obi, a contestant for the governorship of Anambra State in the 2003 elections, is illustrative.
He filed a petition against Mr Chris Ngige who had been declared the winner. However, the final decision was handed down by the Court of Appeal only on January 16, 2006 – nearly three years later.
This in reality denied Mr Obi the right to effectively challenge the election result. Mr Ngige was in office for nearly three years before Mr Obi uprooted him following the successful challenge.
Despite the weaknesses, the Nigerian contestants have shown faith in their country’s institutions. This is good for political stability.
The Tuesday ruling on the validity of President Yar’Adua’s election has further confirmed the independence of the Nigerian Judiciary.
It has overturned other controversial results from the disputed 2007 elections.
So far, seven state governors and one senator have had their elections nullified by the courts.
Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar may be unhappy with the Tuesday ruling – they are appealing — but what is happening in Nigeria, with all the imperfections, is respect for law and constitutionality.
What the judges did was apply the law to the facts presented to the court to come up with the momentous judgment, which has built public confidence and strengthened the demand for improved electoral processes and democratic rule.
The judgment should be welcomed in the world. It is a victory for the rule of law and for democracy.
Story by PETER MWAURA
Publication Date: 3/1/2008
On Tuesday, a Nigerian court ruled that President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua was “validly elected as president”.
The judgment, good or bad, was a watershed in the West African country’s modern history, showing that the rule of law and constitutionalism have taken root in Africa’s most populous democracy.
Even more remarkable is the contrast with Kenya.
While the accusations of rigging and fraud in Nigeria’s poll in April 2007 and Kenya’s of December 2007 are strikingly similar, the routes taken by the aggrieved parties are markedly different.
The Nigerian poll, like Kenya’s, was condemned by international observers as flawed. Indeed, it was said that President Olusegun Obasanjo, who had served his maximum term and was not eligible for re-election, had manipulated the poll to favour Mr Yar’Adua, his preferred successor.
The contrast with Kenya, however, is somewhat dimmed by the differences in the winning margin.
In the Kenyan poll, the margin was thin, with President Kibaki credited with just over 230,000 votes over his nearest competitor, Mr Raila Odinga.
In the Nigerian poll, the margin was big, with President Yar’Adua winning with more than 70 per cent of the vote, compared to 18 per cent of Mr Muhammadu Buhari, a former military ruler, and seven per cent of former vice-president Atiku Abubakar.
The two filed a petition with the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal, arguing that Mr Yar’Adua and Nigeria’s Independent National Electoral Commission had rigged the election which, they argued, should be nullified and a re-run ordered.
They did not claim, as Mr Odinga did in Kenya, that they had actually won the election.
All the same, Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar asked their supporters to remain calm as they sought court justice. But they made it clear that they respected the rule of law and the Judiciary.
Consequently, there were no riots, no demonstrations, no burning and no killing. In contrast, the story in Kenya is all too familiar the world over: the aggrieved politicians and their supporters took to the streets, declaring they had no confidence in Kenya’s judicial system, and anarchy followed.
This scenario sounds almost like a reversal of the stereotypes we entertain about ourselves and West Africans, Nigerians in particular.
Constitutional rule was only re-established in Nigeria in 1999 – more than 30 years after Kenya became independent - following decades of military rule.
Nigeria also gave us Biafra (1967-1970), the first civil war in independent Africa, fought over the demand for secession by a tribe inhabiting the south-east of the country — the Ibos — who were also singled out for ethnic cleansing.
It is also the country where rebels, in the Niger Delta, abduct foreign oil workers with impunity.
We also like to think of Nigerians in general as unruly, loud and cocky and Kenyans as more subdued and law-abiding.
At the same time, Kenya and Nigeria share a system of justice – the common law — and electoral laws.
In Nigeria, as in Kenya, electoral petitions take an unduly long time to determine. Both Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar had to wait for almost a year for the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal to determine their petition.
It is perhaps because of such frustrating delays that Mr Odinga must have decided that Kenyan courts were not the route to take to seek a remedy for his electoral grievances.
In Nigeria, the case of Mr Peter Obi, a contestant for the governorship of Anambra State in the 2003 elections, is illustrative.
He filed a petition against Mr Chris Ngige who had been declared the winner. However, the final decision was handed down by the Court of Appeal only on January 16, 2006 – nearly three years later.
This in reality denied Mr Obi the right to effectively challenge the election result. Mr Ngige was in office for nearly three years before Mr Obi uprooted him following the successful challenge.
Despite the weaknesses, the Nigerian contestants have shown faith in their country’s institutions. This is good for political stability.
The Tuesday ruling on the validity of President Yar’Adua’s election has further confirmed the independence of the Nigerian Judiciary.
It has overturned other controversial results from the disputed 2007 elections.
So far, seven state governors and one senator have had their elections nullified by the courts.
Mr Buhari and Mr Abubakar may be unhappy with the Tuesday ruling – they are appealing — but what is happening in Nigeria, with all the imperfections, is respect for law and constitutionality.
What the judges did was apply the law to the facts presented to the court to come up with the momentous judgment, which has built public confidence and strengthened the demand for improved electoral processes and democratic rule.
The judgment should be welcomed in the world. It is a victory for the rule of law and for democracy.
Commentary (by Standard editorial team) - The future depends on Kibaki and Raila
Ref:http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982589&cid=16
Published on March 1, 2008, 12:00 am
Kenyans are still in celebrating and the joy over the power sharing deal signed by President Kibaki and Orange Democratic Movement leader Mr Raila Odinga is palpable.
After the gale of deaths, displacements and destruction, it is the moment to bring back the tectonic plates that were drifting away from the motherland. It is the time to reinvigorate the sense of oneness and togetherness, as well as sewing up the fissures opened up by ethnic passions.
Even for a government the world shunned by withholding congratulatory messages over disputed and discredited victory, welcome of the political settlement must be surprising.
Many times we pushed our leaders to rise above personal pride, bent the knee and reach out to their opponents. We called for a political settlement, arguing that the only way out of the maze was power sharing.
Many argued, and rightly so, that we did not need external pressure to see the writing on the wall; that we were on the precipice. If there were any doubt the much a Kibaki-Raila deal would achieve, then one just needs to look around and listen to the sigh of relief sweeping through the nation. There can be no doubt, and the politicians too agree, that we have on the table the right prescription and the first doze has shown the magic it can work.
In Kisumu and Kakamega thrilled residents marched to police stations where some of the displaced have been camping. Though they had first caused a scare, particularly because of the images of the killer mobs that drove them their in the first place, it turned out they had a good message. They wanted the displaced to go back to the homes from which they were ejected, and resume normal life.
That is not to say we are out of the woods yet. There are more challenges to overcome, especially the delicate job of operationalising the political settlement through appropriate constitutional amendments.
There is also the resettlement of the about 500,000 displaced now living in the squalor of refugee holding grounds. Truth, justice and restitution are also mandatory but again guided and nurtured by political will.
There is no doubt we are on the right path, but even as we reconcile with the fact that though a travesty took place we must embrace each other and heal the nation, political will shall determine the speed at which the Annan Deal moves.
The point is that Parliament, which begins the process of constitutional review next Thursday, holds the sway.
Party leaders must pursue the process of give and take, knowing as we have seen; some situations that demand sacrifice produce winners on both sides.
Kibaki and Raila must sustain the tempo, nurture trust between themselves and their supporters, and work for one nation. The divisive party politics must take the backseat and negotiations in the next phase demand a greater degree of honesty, good faith and sacrifice.
The true gauge for statesmanship lies in how leaders rebuild their scarred nation, with the help of opponents whose hands they would hitherto not shake. It is found in the hearts of leaders who in crisis exhibit the truest sense of the fact there surely must be more to politics and power. It is manifest in recognising the ominous clouds and steering the ship of the nation towards a different, but more importantly safer course. The nation’s fate again remains in the hands of President Kibaki and Raila.
Published on March 1, 2008, 12:00 am
Kenyans are still in celebrating and the joy over the power sharing deal signed by President Kibaki and Orange Democratic Movement leader Mr Raila Odinga is palpable.
After the gale of deaths, displacements and destruction, it is the moment to bring back the tectonic plates that were drifting away from the motherland. It is the time to reinvigorate the sense of oneness and togetherness, as well as sewing up the fissures opened up by ethnic passions.
Even for a government the world shunned by withholding congratulatory messages over disputed and discredited victory, welcome of the political settlement must be surprising.
Many times we pushed our leaders to rise above personal pride, bent the knee and reach out to their opponents. We called for a political settlement, arguing that the only way out of the maze was power sharing.
Many argued, and rightly so, that we did not need external pressure to see the writing on the wall; that we were on the precipice. If there were any doubt the much a Kibaki-Raila deal would achieve, then one just needs to look around and listen to the sigh of relief sweeping through the nation. There can be no doubt, and the politicians too agree, that we have on the table the right prescription and the first doze has shown the magic it can work.
In Kisumu and Kakamega thrilled residents marched to police stations where some of the displaced have been camping. Though they had first caused a scare, particularly because of the images of the killer mobs that drove them their in the first place, it turned out they had a good message. They wanted the displaced to go back to the homes from which they were ejected, and resume normal life.
That is not to say we are out of the woods yet. There are more challenges to overcome, especially the delicate job of operationalising the political settlement through appropriate constitutional amendments.
There is also the resettlement of the about 500,000 displaced now living in the squalor of refugee holding grounds. Truth, justice and restitution are also mandatory but again guided and nurtured by political will.
There is no doubt we are on the right path, but even as we reconcile with the fact that though a travesty took place we must embrace each other and heal the nation, political will shall determine the speed at which the Annan Deal moves.
The point is that Parliament, which begins the process of constitutional review next Thursday, holds the sway.
Party leaders must pursue the process of give and take, knowing as we have seen; some situations that demand sacrifice produce winners on both sides.
Kibaki and Raila must sustain the tempo, nurture trust between themselves and their supporters, and work for one nation. The divisive party politics must take the backseat and negotiations in the next phase demand a greater degree of honesty, good faith and sacrifice.
The true gauge for statesmanship lies in how leaders rebuild their scarred nation, with the help of opponents whose hands they would hitherto not shake. It is found in the hearts of leaders who in crisis exhibit the truest sense of the fact there surely must be more to politics and power. It is manifest in recognising the ominous clouds and steering the ship of the nation towards a different, but more importantly safer course. The nation’s fate again remains in the hands of President Kibaki and Raila.
Commentary (by Barrack Muluka) - Seeing everything through ethnic prism is our undoing
Ref: http://www.eastandard.net/news/?id=1143982590&cid=15
Published on March 1, 2008, 12:00 am
By Barrack Muluka
I have been thumping through my scrapbook for last year, from a cheerless little hotel room in the Congo.
On this particular afternoon, I am in Kinshasa waiting for daybreak so that I can return home, in Nairobi.
In the morning, I found myself in a little situation with an acquaintance in Brazzaville, the capital of the other Congo, just across the great river.
He asked why I was going back to Kenya, yet there is war. Defensively, I retorted, "What is wrong with us having a few street protests in assorted towns?"
And I went on: "You people have had your rocket fire, mortar and brimstone. You’ve had your horrific wars, lasting upwards of a decade at a time. Can’t we have a few demos in our streets without the whole world gloating over ‘war in Kenya’? If you are waiting for war in Nairobi, we are going to disappoint you. We did not go to school so that we can do to our country what you have done to yours."
But back in the solitude of this tiny hotel room, my scrapbook gives the lie to my avowals. It is my precious treasure trove and the storehouse of my thoughts at tranquillity.
I am reading where I scribbled down on February 16 last year: "We shall fry in the oil of hypocrisy, we Africans called Kenyans." The opposite page reads: "The day the Kikuyu stop telling me that I ‘hate’ Mwai Kibaki, the Luos stop saying I have vendetta against Raila and the Luhya stop calling me a traitor, against their Mudavadi, that is the day Kenya will start the journey to the Promised Land."
Elsewhere it reads: "A nation that is torn along ethnic lines is a nation at war with itself – March ‘07". Finally there are these words: "I am not a prophet of doom. I am only a painstaking and honest reader of history."
But I am now wondering whether anyone really cares for history, really. For, I am all too familiar with Africans who say of history that it is boring. Never mind that history has brought them into the pretty mess they wallow in, from Addis to Abidjan and from Cape Town to Cairo.
On Sunday evening, I was sitting on the banks of the Congo in Brazzaville, staring across as the sun set on Kinshasa. You cannot help wondering what made the two adventurers, Pierre De Brazza and Henry Morton Stanley, settle for this point as the headquarters of their plunder of the wild rubber and of the precious stones of the Congo.
I make a mental note to revisit my readings on the Congo. That aside, the sunset knocks you breathless. As twilight descends on Kinshasa, it brings alive in its wake the electric lights of the city. Kinshasa steadily transforms into a gem, an African golden jewel floating on the Congo. Across the Congo, this is the quintessence of paradise.
But can a continent that cannot audit the actions of its leaders evolve into anything paradisiacal? We audit the activities of leaders from other tribes. My eyes have seen in the two Congo republics the atrocious things ethnicity; greed and war can do to promising states.
Brazzaville boasts of grenade blasted buildings all over. The new democratic government has its job well cut out. Kinshasa is a pathetic wasteland in the heart of squalor. Mobutu messed them up properly. The crutches and wheelchairs scattered all over the streets for sale tell it all. You do not peddle wheelchairs as if they were groundnuts for evening tea.
The following day, I sit on the plane next to a Congolese gentleman heading to Malabo in Equatorial Guinea. His country is separated from Equatorial Guinea by the tiny Gabon. But to get to Malabo, he must first fly to Nairobi. From here, he will fly to Yaounde in Cameroon then fly again to Equatorial Guinea. Such are the contradictions in Mother Africa. You fly over your country four times to complete one round trip.
Perhaps Kenyans can still be saved from the need to fly to Cairo so that they can fly to Zambia to visit Maputo. Perhaps we can still save Kenya from the rocket and mortar of the Congo.
I remain cautiously optimistic after the treaty between President Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga. For I know the problem is not confined to Raila and Kibaki. The problem is with all of us who see things only through the greedy ethnic prism.
Arrogant self-seekers will be jostling for space in high places in coming days. They will do everything possible to take us the Congo way, if their personal greed is not addressed. My pen has just been sharpened ahead of the things to come, in the wake of the Kibaki-Raila Agreement. Watch this space.
The writer is a publishing editor and a media consultant with Mvule Africa Publishers.
Published on March 1, 2008, 12:00 am
By Barrack Muluka
I have been thumping through my scrapbook for last year, from a cheerless little hotel room in the Congo.
On this particular afternoon, I am in Kinshasa waiting for daybreak so that I can return home, in Nairobi.
In the morning, I found myself in a little situation with an acquaintance in Brazzaville, the capital of the other Congo, just across the great river.
He asked why I was going back to Kenya, yet there is war. Defensively, I retorted, "What is wrong with us having a few street protests in assorted towns?"
And I went on: "You people have had your rocket fire, mortar and brimstone. You’ve had your horrific wars, lasting upwards of a decade at a time. Can’t we have a few demos in our streets without the whole world gloating over ‘war in Kenya’? If you are waiting for war in Nairobi, we are going to disappoint you. We did not go to school so that we can do to our country what you have done to yours."
But back in the solitude of this tiny hotel room, my scrapbook gives the lie to my avowals. It is my precious treasure trove and the storehouse of my thoughts at tranquillity.
I am reading where I scribbled down on February 16 last year: "We shall fry in the oil of hypocrisy, we Africans called Kenyans." The opposite page reads: "The day the Kikuyu stop telling me that I ‘hate’ Mwai Kibaki, the Luos stop saying I have vendetta against Raila and the Luhya stop calling me a traitor, against their Mudavadi, that is the day Kenya will start the journey to the Promised Land."
Elsewhere it reads: "A nation that is torn along ethnic lines is a nation at war with itself – March ‘07". Finally there are these words: "I am not a prophet of doom. I am only a painstaking and honest reader of history."
But I am now wondering whether anyone really cares for history, really. For, I am all too familiar with Africans who say of history that it is boring. Never mind that history has brought them into the pretty mess they wallow in, from Addis to Abidjan and from Cape Town to Cairo.
On Sunday evening, I was sitting on the banks of the Congo in Brazzaville, staring across as the sun set on Kinshasa. You cannot help wondering what made the two adventurers, Pierre De Brazza and Henry Morton Stanley, settle for this point as the headquarters of their plunder of the wild rubber and of the precious stones of the Congo.
I make a mental note to revisit my readings on the Congo. That aside, the sunset knocks you breathless. As twilight descends on Kinshasa, it brings alive in its wake the electric lights of the city. Kinshasa steadily transforms into a gem, an African golden jewel floating on the Congo. Across the Congo, this is the quintessence of paradise.
But can a continent that cannot audit the actions of its leaders evolve into anything paradisiacal? We audit the activities of leaders from other tribes. My eyes have seen in the two Congo republics the atrocious things ethnicity; greed and war can do to promising states.
Brazzaville boasts of grenade blasted buildings all over. The new democratic government has its job well cut out. Kinshasa is a pathetic wasteland in the heart of squalor. Mobutu messed them up properly. The crutches and wheelchairs scattered all over the streets for sale tell it all. You do not peddle wheelchairs as if they were groundnuts for evening tea.
The following day, I sit on the plane next to a Congolese gentleman heading to Malabo in Equatorial Guinea. His country is separated from Equatorial Guinea by the tiny Gabon. But to get to Malabo, he must first fly to Nairobi. From here, he will fly to Yaounde in Cameroon then fly again to Equatorial Guinea. Such are the contradictions in Mother Africa. You fly over your country four times to complete one round trip.
Perhaps Kenyans can still be saved from the need to fly to Cairo so that they can fly to Zambia to visit Maputo. Perhaps we can still save Kenya from the rocket and mortar of the Congo.
I remain cautiously optimistic after the treaty between President Kibaki and Mr Raila Odinga. For I know the problem is not confined to Raila and Kibaki. The problem is with all of us who see things only through the greedy ethnic prism.
Arrogant self-seekers will be jostling for space in high places in coming days. They will do everything possible to take us the Congo way, if their personal greed is not addressed. My pen has just been sharpened ahead of the things to come, in the wake of the Kibaki-Raila Agreement. Watch this space.
The writer is a publishing editor and a media consultant with Mvule Africa Publishers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)