Kenyans should learn to tolerate each other

During the requiem mass for the students who perished in a road accident in Kisii politicians and officials leaning towards the government received an unusually hostile reception. Opposition Cord leader Raila Odinga and his team were, however, accorded a rousing welcome and were roundly applauded each time they rose to speak.

The jeering of Information cabinet secretary Fred Matiang'i and former cabinet minister Sam Ongeri who is perceived to be sympathetic to the Jubilee government and refusal of the crowd to listen to President Uhuru Kenyatta's message of condolence should be denounced in the strongest terms possible. A requiem mass is a sacred event at which mourners should be conscious of the pain and loss of the bereaved families.

This rings true especially for communities from western Kenya which are famed for the seriousness with which they take mourning the loss of loved ones. Allowing political differences to dominate such a solemn event reflects badly on us and cannot, in any way, be justified. It is conduct unbecoming of any civilised society.

The conduct of the crowd at Gusii Stadium, nonetheless, points to a more serious problem that is afflicting our country. It points to long-term and historical divisions that have the potential of wreaking so much havoc in the country. It is said that 'a house divided against itself cannot stand'. When Kenyans begin to view people affiliated to either the government or opposition as enemies, more harm than good is done to the national fabric. It undermines unity leaving the country torn right in the middle.

As a matter of fact hostility towards the government was one of the reasons why the past three regimes of Mzee Jomo Kenyatta, Daniel arap Moi and Mwai Kibaki embraced a policy of skewed distribution of national resources. The three eminent Kenyans ensured that regions that were seen to be averse to the government and its policies were starved of development resources. Regions that were perceived to be friendly and supportive of the government benefited the most in the distribution of resources. In this age and time, no community would want to be left behind as others progress.

It would be recalled that the 2007-08 post-election violence, which drove Kenya right to the brink of the precipice, largely sprung out of pent-up political differences. Kenyans from diverse communities had, for far too long, been viewing each other as enemies. Underneath the seemingly innocuous and amiable exteriors resided anger and hostility towards communities that were regarded as having benefited immensely by having 'one of their own' in power. The elections and consequent claims of rigging only touched off violence that had, all along , been threatening to erupt.

No doubt no Kenyan would want to be taken back to the dark sordid past. Memories of how bad things were are still fresh in our minds. In fact many Kenyans are still reeling from the ramifications of the post-election debacle. Yet exhibiting intolerance to divergent opinion is a sure way to take us many steps back. It leaves those to whom we have been hostile looking at us as enemies even though we are all Kenyans.

True, we cannot hold the same political opinion or identify with the same political camp but we can still respectfully disagree on whatever issue that is threatening to tear us apart. Let us learn to be tolerant of each other.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on July 27, 2013

Leaders are a reflection of a society

Values define both individuals and societies. With the right values, the well being of a society is guaranteed. Conversely, when a society subscribes to base values, its future and the welfare of its members are in jeopardy. Values such as accountability, transparency, austerity, equality, good governance among others have, since time immemorial, been part and parcel of progressive societies.

Consequently before decrying the proliferation of vices such as graft, profligacy, negative ethnicity, insensitivity among others among their leaders, Kenyans must first call to mind the fact that leaders do no descent from Mars or any other planet. They come from among us and their way of doing things is largely a reflection of ourselves.

Any keen observer must have noticed a somewhat strange, if not annoying trend, among Kenyans. Unlike societies where so much value is placed on accountability, the impression we Kenyans are giving is that we don't find it imperative to hold people to account.

Picture this. A man who is working in the public service and earning less than Sh30,000 a month shows up in the village with his newly-acquired top of the range fuel guzzler. He may go ahead and put up a state-of-the-art maisonette or bungalow within a very short while in the village. Dazed and dazzled by 'one of their own's' instant display of power and wealth, the villagers send a delegation of elders to their 'prominent' son to implore him to consider being their elected representative in some big office.

This is notwithstanding the fact that there's no way their son, who is a middle-level civil servant, can afford the car he is now zooming in and the house he has constructed even if he were to save 90 per cent of his salary every month for the rest of his working life. The fact that he has not taken any loan from his employer or bank further leaves many questions as to how he managed to acquire the multi-million limousine and the magnificent house he now lays claim to. But to the villagers, the end justifies the means. The fact that their son has made it big is all that matters. How he made his way to big money is a non-issue over which time should not be wasted. In fact he now becomes the village heroe to be showcased to neighbouring villages who thought they are the only ones who produce prominent sons.

Those among us who raise the red flag each time they feel things are not right are labelled traitors and have to contend with all manner of insults. In Michela Wrong's, "It Is Our Turn To Eat," former Ethics and Anti-graft permanent secretary John Githongo shares of how immediately the Narc government rode to power in 2003, some of its top honchos were purchasing several multi-million properties in Nairobi's leafy suburbs at ago. This struck him as strange. However, each time he tried to establish the source of this questionable millions, he was always met with unflagging resistance and veiled threats on his life. Feeling lonely, dejected, increasingly being viewed as the enemy within and with a conscience that could not allow him to sit and watch as public resources were salted away into individual pockets, Githongo resigned and went into exile.

In reacting to Githongo's brave move, a section of Kenyans hurled unprintable abuses at him. From being branded unpatriotic to being labelled a malignant colonial relic dutifully doing his masters bidding, Githongo heard and saw it all. Yet what he had done was to say no to pilferage of public resources. Like him or hate him, there's no denying that he represents the very few among us whose conscience can't stand the sight of ill-gotten wealth. He is a rare jewel,  the epitome of transparency, a champion of sound governance.

In countries such as Norway, Denmark and many others accountability is one of the values held in high esteem. In Norway if a public servant whose known sources of income can hardly enable him or her procure certain assets, instantly purchases, say a very expensive car, he will have to give a detailed explanation of how he managed to acquire the car. And if he cannot proffer a convincing explanation to the anti-corruption authorities, the car will be confiscated and he will, in all likelihood, be arraigned in court on graft charges. Needless to say this has drastically cut down on graft leaving Norway one of the least corrupt countries in the world.

Back to Kenyans, there is an urgent need for us to thoroughly interrogate our values. The truth is that those serving in middle level offices and are corrupt will carry the same attribute to a bigger office once elected. Kenyans should learn to ask questions and seek answers. Blindly entrusting people who have stolen from state coffers with more resources and complaining when they further loot the public purse reflects badly on us.

MPs should be the last people to hurl stones at governors

The alacrity with which human beings see faults in others and point them out is legendary. Blaming everyone else apart from ourselves is as ancient as mankind. From looks, conduct, to general comportment, it never ceases to amaze me how swift people are in judging others.

In the Holy Bible, the book of 2 Samuel 11 to be precise, we read of King David of Israel. Fondly referred to by God as a man after his own heart, David was an irrefutably valiant warrior. But one time after dispatching his army to war, he retreated to the comfort of his palace. While walking on the roof of his residence in the evening, he spotted a beautiful woman bathing and on inquiring who this lady was, he was informed that it was Bathsheba, the wife of Uriah, one of the soldiers doing battle with the enemy.

Overwhelmed by the urge to sleep with Bathsheba, David send for her and indeed committed adultery with the woman. As if this was not sufficiently disgusting, David instructed Joab, the captain of his army, to position Uriah at the front-line of the battle. His intention was to have Uriah killed so that he could take the now widowed Bathsheba to be one of his wives.

When God sent Nathan to go register his displeasure with David's sordid act, Nathan delivered the message but indirectly. He commenced by sharing with David the story of a rich man who owned many flocks and a poor man whose only possession was one well-fed ewe lamb which he treasured immensely.

One day a visitor called on the wealthy man and rather than take one of the many sheep he possessed and give it to the visitor, he forcefully took the poor man's lamb and gifted it to his visitor. So enraged was King David with the heartless action of the rich man that he cursed such a man deserved nothing but death. And then Nathan dropped the bombshell by informing David that the cruel rich man was him while the poor man was Uriah whose wife David (the rich man) had taken away.

We see something more or less similar to David's judgmental attitude towards the unjust rich man in modern day society. Nowhere are such scenarios played out with remarkable clarity more than in the political arena. Last week an MP introduced a motion in the National Assembly to ostensibly discuss the conduct of the 47 county governors. It was the contention of this honourable member that the kleptocracy and profligacy of governors had reached horrifying proportions and the sooner they are tamed the better for the country.

Like safari ants, MPs rallied behind their colleague's motion heaping all manner of blame on the governors. One by one the honourable members tore into the conduct of governors terming them as the foremost enemies of devolution and a good for nothing lot. One of the MPs shared of how while attending an event in his constituency he heard some of the people in attendance refer to someone as 'His Excellency' and wondered why the President was visiting his constituency without his knowledge. But on closer look, he learnt with disbelief that it was the area governor being referred to as 'His Excellency'. Another member regaled his colleagues and the public with tales of how governors were now mini presidents with first ladies to boot and called for urgent action to be taken to cut them to size.

Admittedly, since the inception of county governments, governors, with the exception of just a few, have, in every respect, conducted themselves in a manner that is indisputably inimical to the ethos and objects of devolution. Their gravitation towards big spending has confounded friend and foe alike. Fears abound that unless sobriety prevails, the whole devolution project may as well come a cropper.

The question we must, nonetheless, pose to MPs is, do they have the moral authority to roundly lampoon and chastise governors? Since when did austerity become one of the lode stars by which MPs navigate? In my view MPs should be the last people to hurl stones at governors. MPs are largely to blame for the burgeoning wage bill that the already heavily taxed Kenyan taxpayer has to bear. Rather than be part of the solution they have unapologetically elected to be part of the problem.

Like King David, they are seeing the speck in the other guy's eye and turning a blind eye to the speck in their own eyes. Like governors whose greed for power they are faulting, they recently declared themselves to be superior to senators and insisted that the National Assembly and not the Senate is the lone repository of real power. Like governors whose appetite for astronomical salaries and allowances they find reprehensible, they recently arm-twisted the Salaries and Remuneration Commission into awarding them perks that can hardly be sustained by our economy.

Lashing out at governors for doing the selfsame things MPs are guilty for reeks of unacceptable hypocrisy. MPs cannot delude anyone. They are in Parliament to further their own interests and not that of the people they purport to represent.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on 20-7-2013

What Kenya needs is a man or woman with a vision

As time flies by and the clock ferociously ticks towards 2012, all around us Kenyans of diverse shades and shapes are popping up to declare their intention to vie for the presidency. In and of itself, a declaration of an intention to gun for the country’s top seat cannot be faulted. As a matter of fact, the Constitution, in Article 38 unequivocally and unambiguously affords all qualified Kenyans the right to contest for any elective office of their choice.

What is of grave concern to Kenyans, nonetheless, is what these presidential wannabes are bringing to the National dining table. Kenyans are keenly interested in knowing the ideologies they are bringing to the National high table and whether they have any vision for the country.

Needless to say that the office of the president is so highly esteemed that it can only be trifled with to the detriment of the whole country. Lest we forget this is the very office that, apart from serving as the nerve centre of the country’s affairs, it is the fulcrum around which weighty governance issues revolve. Mess up with the presidency and the whole country is sold to anarchy.

The canvas of history is painted with chilling and terrifying tales of countries that were literally driven to the dogs by despots, who earlier in their political careers passed themselves as reformists with their country’s best interests at heart. While a few overthrew legitimate regimes and installed themselves as leaders, the majority were handed popular mandate by their fellow countrymen and women, oblivious of the tyranny and crassness that lurked behind the seemingly innocuous exteriors.

Uganda is one such example. When Field marshal Idi Amin Dada overthrew the Milton Obote regime in 1971 and ensconced himself in office, he embarked Uganda on a downward spiral from which it has never fully recovered. In no time, the Ugandan economy was in tatters, following Amin’s draconian and ruthless way of dealing with investors. He became a law unto himself, killing and maiming both real and imaginary adversaries.

Somalia-the global headquarters of anarchy- is also where it is due to ludicrous leadership. With such glaring and petrifying examples all around us it is only prudent and in order that we tread circumspectly as we approach the 2013 general election. Like the biblical children of Israel, we are a critical stage in our march towards the Promised Land of economic vibrancy. We cannot afford to entrust the country’s leadership with the mediocre types. Doing so will be tantamount to chaining our motherland to economic, political and social stagnation.

Look at the whole lot that is brimming with a fierce ambition to succeed President Kibaki when he vacates office. Prime Minister Raila Odinga, DPM Uhuru Kenyatta, VP Kalonzo Musyoka, Eldoret North MP William Ruto, Gichugu MP, Martha Karua, the Reverent Mutava Musyimi et al. Who among them has never dipped his/her fingers in the national purse and stolen from the public? Who among them has never used his/her influential position to secure employment and other opportunities for incompetent relatives and cronies?

Who among them can look Kenyans in the eye and render a convincing account of how they amassed their wealth? Who among them has never engaged in political activities verging on the ridiculous and calculated to dismember Kenyans along ethnic lines and further his/her own selfish political ends?

If any of them can answer those questions to my satisfaction he or she can count on my support. One need not to be a seer to behold the appalling poverty of thought afflicting Kenyan politics. The Kenyan political stage is teeming with opportunists that will have no qualms selling the whole country to the highest bidder. We have the misfortune of being saddled with a political class that specialises in spewing falsehoods and treating Kenyans with the utmost contempt.

Come to think of it; some of the people promising to walk Kenyans to economic nirvana if elected as president are no paying taxes. Some are even still battling corruption related cases in courts of law. Won’t it be foolish to peg the hopes of a whole country on such people? How on earth can we expect such thieving types to be possessed of what it takes to bail a country out of impecuniousness?

What this country needs is a man or woman with a sound and credible vision. Kenya urgently needs someone that is shone of the raw rapacity and magalomania that is the forte of the vast majority of our politicians. We need someone that will not hesitate to take on the hydra-headed dragon of impunity that is still holding sway in our country.

It is only a man or woman that is possessed of a sense of direction and has a severe and deeply embedded distaste for sleaze that will help steer our country up the road of economic,social and political advancement. Anything less than that is child’s play and the height of delusion.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on November 5, 2011

Struggle against drug lords

On June 1 last year, US President Barack Obama, under the powers conferred on him by section 804(a) of the Foreign Narcotics Kingpin Designation Act 21 U.S.C, named several people from various parts of the world as drug kingpins. Obama pointed out that these people were to be apprehended and made to pay for their misdeeds.

The naming of the individuals was big news then. The story hogged newspaper headlines across the globe for quite some time. Nearly ten months since then, not much attention is being paid to the thorny issue of drugs and drug abuse.

But to the few still keeping a keen eye to the goings-on in the society, the drugs conundrum is alive and furiously kicking. The havoc that abuse of hard drugs is inflicting on our society is far beyond the realms of imagination. Young lives are increasingly wasting away due to an unmitigated abuse of drugs.

In Kenya Coast province is undoubtedly the hardest hit. The toll that drugs have taken on many youth at the Coast is plainly inexplicable. The reason as to why Obama’s call to the world to arise and seriously wage war against drugs, drug abuse and drug kingpins seems to have been relegated to the gutters remains unclear to me.

But amidst the scant attention that the world and Kenya in particular is paying to the drug menace, there is a handful of individuals whose resolve to do something to rid Kenya of hard drugs cannot go unnoticed. These are gallant sons and daughters of our soil who have laid their lives on the line in their quest to halt the destruction that drugs are visiting on fellow countrymen and women.

But as it always happens, evil does not easily give way to good. The two forces of evil and good have since the inception of time been engaged in a vicious battle for supremacy. The proponents of what is good can, nonetheless, take inestimable solace in the fact that no matter how furiously and ferociously evil fights, what is good eventually triumphs. On December 17,2011, former Ethics PS John Githongo and International Center for Policy and Conflict boss Ndung’u Wainaina published a story titled, “DRUGS, THE FINAL FRONTIER IN THE WAR AGAINST CORRUPTION” in the Weekend Star.

This story vividly brought home to us how huge and gargantuan the drug problem is. Writing in the said article, the two advocates of good governance had these to say about the drug problem in Kenya, “IN MIDDLE CLASS circles, first in whispers but with increasing volume, it’s now clear that we have an internal drug problem as well. Kenya is not only a trans-shipment point from the Far East to the West-we have become consumers as well. The Coast has been particularly had hit, especially by heroin delivered as ‘brown sugar’. Teenagers at some of Nairobi’s most prestigious schools have gotten caught up in the problem as well helping create a fledgling but lucrative drug rehabilitation industry in the country.”

Apprehensive of Githongo’s and Ndungu’s efforts to take the dragon of hard drugs head on, one of the suspected drug Kingpins has since moved to court, in protest of what he terms as an unwarranted violation of his constitutionally guaranteed rights. The case is still sub judice, a fact that restrains me from delving into its merits or demerits.

There are, however, documents in the public domain in regard to this case whose contents leaves more questions than answers. One such document titled “WE THE PEOPLE” THERAPY ON NARCOTIC TRAFFICKERS IN KENYA, allegedly prepared by John Githongo during his reign as the CEO of Twaweza particularly got me curious.

What is strange about this document is that it was purportedly prepared last year yet Githongo left Twawaza way back in June 2010. At the same time records at Twaweza clearly indicate that no such document was ever prepared. This then puts the authenticity of the document in serious question.

In the selfsame suit allegations abound as to how some meeting to strategise on how to demonstrate against drugs and drug kingpins was on November 28, 2011 held at the British High Commission in Upper Hill Nairobi. At the meeting, said to have been attended by about 30 people, Githongo and Ndung’u are alleged to have strategised on how to raise funds from donors and mobilise youth in diverse parts of the country to demonstrate against suspected drug Kingpins.

According to the document, these demonstrations were to be held in Coast, Central, Western, Nairobi and Rift Valley. The Nairobi demonstrations were to be major and more funds were to be set apart for that. The target was to capitalise on the idleness of many Kenyan youth and mobilise at least a thousand youth in each of the five regions.

These allegations, however, fly in the face of a letter from the British High Commission in which the commission refutes in the strongest terms possible claims that such a meeting was ever held at its premises.” The strongly-worded letter reads in part: “The British High Commission wishes to make clear that the allegations are totally false and baseless. Firstly, there was no such meeting on November 28 at the High Commission. Secondly, none of our staff has ever attended such a meeting involving the group that is claimed to have gathered at the High Commission for the stated purpose. Thirdly, the High Commission takes great exception to the fanciful allegation that it would organise such a meeting for the stated purposes. Fourthly, that at no time has the High Commission offered funding to the group to undertake drug abuse programmes or activities.”

It cannot go unnoticed that in respect of the allegations in this case, a number of the defendants, including Githongo, Wainaina and Tom Mboya, have all sworn affidavits denying having planned demonstrations in the first place. Furthermore, the three also deny any knowledge of the alleged meeting at the British High Commission.

While a number of far-reaching orders were initially granted on the January 9, in the absence of the above defendants, who had not been served, it is also of interest that those orders have now lapsed given the fact that the Plaintiff’s advocates did not seek an extension at the hearing on February 14. The matter comes up again for hearing on February 23.

As earlier on intimated it is the forces of darkness and light that are locking horns in this whole spectacle. People who are believed to have made a killing out of peddling drugs are not just about to let go. The inescapable question is, will the Kenyan society and the world at large just seat and watch as so much harm is visited on young lives by hard drugs? Is it not time for all who care to rise in total defiance of the myriad threats to their lives and stay this mess?

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on February 18, 2012

Africa woes a result of poor leadership

Of all the continents on planet earth, Africa ranks among the most impoverished. Nowhere else is famine, illiteracy, HIV/Aids among other catastrophies spoken about more than in Africa.

The awful and mortifying spectre of African heads of state or their agents prostrating themselves before western donors with begging bowls firmly clutched in their hands is not news.

The irony is that when it comes to minerals and other resources, it is not in dispute that Africa is one of the most richly endowed continents. It consequently beats logic why a continent that is brimming with vast resources is still shackled to such infuriating and overwhelming levels of poverty.

Few will refute the fact that there's nothing to celebrate about poverty. The havoc that poverty has and is still wreaking in many lives is there for all to behold. It is, as a matter of fact, man's worst adversary against whom we must wage relentless war. This then calls for a thorough and honest interrogation of the question why in the midst of so much, we are still victims of sickening poverty.

In about one year's time, Kenya's third President Kibaki will be leaving office after a two five-year stint. If he were to be judged against his predecessor and the country's founding President, Mzee Jomo Kenyatta, Kibaki has performed appreciably well in his service to the country. He will go down the annals of history as the president who gave Kenya's infrastructure a serious face lift.

It is, nonetheless, the gratuity and a gamut of other benefits that Kibaki will be entitled to as he leaves office that has got me thinking about Africa and what ails her. As he vacates office, Kibaki will be entitled to a Sh50 million gratuity. Apart from this hefty pay, Finance minister Robinson Githae has also proposed that the retired Presidents' annual allocation be increased from the current Sh17.7 million to Sh30.2 million.

Besides, a retirement home for President Kibaki, estimated to cost taxpayers Sh500 million, is currently under construction on a 1,000 acre farm near Mweiga town on the Nyeri-Nyahururu Highway. He will also be entitled to hundreds of thousands of shillings as housing allowance, utilities, fuel allowance, security and entertainment allowance, all to be paid for by the taxpayers.

Looking at this plethora of benefits that will be due to retiring Presidents, the question that quickly springs to mind is, do they really need all these? Bearing our Gross Domestic Product and the state of our economy in mind, can we really afford all these? In view of the squalor and despicable conditions in which the majority of Kenyans live, is it not obscene to accord an individual who is already affluent all these benefits?

At least this gives us a glimpse into what is ailing Africa. The maladies stalking Africa are traceable to substandard leadership. African leaders are the principle architects of the woes besetting her. They run their countries like personal property. Many are a law unto themselves and anyone who dares to question their excesses is met with unparalleled cruelty.

Apparently, it is majorly in Africa that sitting heads of state have managed to arm-twist legislators into altering constitutions to afford them more terms in office. It is in Africa that octogenerians who have clearly outlived their usefulness still cling onto power and are showing no signs of making way for younger blood. Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, former Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade and many others are fitting examples.

African leaders are, nonetheless, not the only ones in this madness. Their cronies have done everything to urge them on. In Zimbabwe for instance, Mugabe's cohorts have been unremitting in their insistence that he should rule until death. Each time matters to do with his failing health are mentioned, they come out like wounded lions ready to do battle with the President's real and imaginary enemies.

In 2006, the Kenyan Parliament in its wisdom or lack of it increased the President's basic monthly pay from Sh2 million to Sh3 million to the chagrin of many Kenyans. Luckily, President Kibaki rejected this and pointed out that his conscience could not permit him to earn so much when many Kenyans are languishing in poverty.

And now it is Finance minister Robinson Githae who has proposed that the annual allocation for retired Presidents be increased. Githae should be privy to something that is alien to the rest of us. Otherwise why would he make such outlandish proposals when doctors and a host of other public servants are on a constant warpath with the government due to their poor pay?

A paradigm shift is long overdue in Kenya and Africa at large. It is foolhardy to expect our lot to change for the better yet we are not prepared to adopt new and reasonable ways of doing things. Time is running out and the sooner we realise this and change, the better. I appeal to President Kibaki to reject these excessive benefits.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on May 5, 2012

'Tyranny of numbers' should be employed for public good

In the traditional African setting having many children and wives was priced to the high heavens. A man whose brood and caboodle was replete with children was considered affluent and held in the highest esteem. Such were the men whose opinions were highly regarded. Those who embraced monogamy and had just a handful of children were treated with disdain.

 A number of reasons explain why a large family was desirable in the early days. For starters, the sheer strength of numbers provided cheap labour when it came to duties such as tilling huge swathes of land which were a common phenomenon in those days. The security of a man with several wives and an army of children was also guaranteed. Anyone with plans to raid a home teeming with young men would think twice before embarking on his mission. The desire to be one of the opinion shapers also impelled men to marry many wives and sire many children.

This belief in the strength of numbers is still evident in modern day society. In our time we have a political class whose crave for numbers far surpasses the worth that our great grandparents placed on having several wives and children. Shortly after he was declared the winner of the March 4, 2013 general election, President Uhuru Kenyatta moved to consolidate his powers by incorporating as many MPs and Senators as possible in his camp. He cajoled MPs from fringe parties such as the United Democratic Front among others into joining the Jubilee Coalition. There's nothing dishonourable in the President's move if regard is to be had to the fact that a government that doesn't command numbers in Parliament  can hardly push through its agenda.

Blessed with numbers in Parliament, President Kenyatta has been able to marshal support for the approval of his nominees to various posts. Chances are that government Bills will also sail through without breaking much sweat. Be that as it may, the nomination, vetting, approval and eventual appointment of people to public office by the Jubilee Government has left proponents of good governance brimming with fury. That the President and Parliament would gloss over the credible integrity issues raised by members of the public in regard to some of the nominees and approve their appointment to public office is incredibly rankling.

Take the case of a former top official at a private university whose conduct at the institution of higher learning was seriously called into question. A group of Kenyans even tabled evidence before the Parliamentary committee that vetted him to establish the veracity of their allegations against him. Before the vetting a leading newspaper carried a story implicating him in despicable scandals at the university. With such adverse accusations many believed that his goose was cooked and chances of his appointment to public office were almost nil. But to the great shock and disbelief of advocates of sound governance, he was declared fit to serve and is now ensconced in office, thanks to the 'tyranny of numbers'.

In the normal course of events, meritocracy, competence and, to a certain degree, experience should inform appointments to public office. The world over, anyone who has deputised someone, say the Attorney General, for quite sometime is considered to be in a better position to succeed his boss. But this seems not to be the case in Kenya. When the then Solicitor General, Wanjuki Muchemi left office, applications for his position were invited. Among the applicants was Deputy Solicitor General Muthoni Kimani. Suffice it to mention that Muthoni Kimani has been in the Attorney General's office for more than 20 years rising through the ranks to her current position. She is perhaps the longest serving officer in the AG's office and therefore better versed with what should be done to make it more efficient. But rather than pick Mrs Kimani, President Kenyatta nominated his long-term ally Njee Muturi for the position of Solicitor General.

During his vetting by the Parliamentary Committee on Legal Affairs it was sufficiently clear that Muturi's CV was not as impressive as Mrs Kimani's. Muturi's name was ultimately tabled in Parliament for approval and by virtue of the now famed 'tyranny of numbers' he easily sailed through. He has since been appointed the Solicitor General.

I have nothing personal against the said public officers. As a matter of fact they are as Kenyan as anyone else and are within their constitutionally guaranteed right to occupy public office. But the question that bears interrogation is, what is the purpose of vetting? In my view, vetting is aimed at establishing the suitability of an individual to serve in a particular office. Once it emerges that such an individual is tainted, the honourable thing for him to do is to disqualify himself.

Alternatively, the vetting authority should declare such a person unsuitable. It is unfortunate that rather than serve the public good, the Jubilee Government is employing its numbers in Parliament to push through parochial interests. It should therefore not surprise us that Kenya is one of the few countries where what matters most when it comes to appointments to public office is who you are affiliated to. Matters such as integrity and meritocracy are given short shrift as long as you are in good books of the big boys.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on July 13,2013

Graft should be unremittingly fought from all fronts

On Thursday last week a group of Members of Parliament led by outspoken Gwasi legislator John Mbadi held a meeting at Parliament's Old Chambers during which they accused members of the Parliamentary Service Commission of a litany of ills and asked them to resign.

Key among the ills that the PSC was lambasted for is varying multi-billion shilling contracts, extortion and nepotism in staff employment, salaries and promotions. Collectively these ills amount to corruption. To the vast majority of Kenyans there is nothing novel about these allegations. Any honest Kenyan will tell you that graft is so real in this country that only an imbecile will dispute its existence.

Efforts to rid the country of this awful vice have consistently come a cropper granted that some of its key architects and movers are men and women wielding immense cloud. A recent report by the National Cohesion and Integration Commission on distribution of jobs in the civil service made for interesting reading. In the said report, the Kibunja-led commission argued that employment and other opportunities are normally skewed in favour of the president's community.

So far only two communities have produced the three presidents Kenya has had and true to the commission's assertions people hailing from the two communities constitute the greater bulk of the civil service. This is directly attributable to the infamous 'our turn to eat syndrome' that has for far too long held sway in our country. No sooner one is elected or appointed to public office than he or she sets out to instal people from his/her ethnic community in as many positions as possible.

 The tragedy is that in the mad rash to have 'my people' all over key considerations like meritocracy and competence are relegated to the gutters and all that matters is doling out jobs to people from the big man's community. This explains why, as alleged by the MPs, there is a typist at Parliament earning more than a PhD holder. This loathsome spectre is not just restricted to the Legislature. In fact what we are being told about the PSC is child's play in comparison to what is obtaining in some key parastatals and other government sectors.

If thorough research and auditing were to be undertaken in other government departments many will be petrified and aghast at how deep graft runs in our country. Thousands of young graduate Kenyans have failed to get places to do internship for no other reason other than hailing from the 'wrong' community. Competent and able employees have been demoted, prematurely retired or even shown the door to make room for incompetent relatives and cronies of the high and mighty. Is it any wonder then that we are saddled with a civil service that is hopelessly in the grip of annoying incompetence, lethargy and overwhelming levels of inertia? More often than not we read and hear of thousands of ghost workers in many government departments that continue to draw huge salaries at the end of every month.

The plain truth is that this has nothing to do with non-existent workers but has everything to do with die hard cartels out to fleece the Kenyan taxpayer. It is an astutely choreographed ploy to enrich a clique of well heeled members of the civil service at the expense of the taxpayer. Besides, bidders for lucrative government contracts, as exemplified by the Parliamentary Service Commission in a contract to purchase a new office block, can as well forget everything about clinching the contracts they are bidding for-no matter how qualified- unless they are ready to part with substantial amounts of money as kickbacks.

Throw in the awful spectre of members of the PSC inviting women for sexual escapades in their offices, as revealed at the meeting held by MPs last Thursday, and you know that the rot is far much worse than we are imagining. Clearly all these paints a distressing and rankling picture. The million dollar question is, what should then be done?

In my view, attempts to bail us out of this quandary should majorly target young Kenyans. Churches, Mosques and schools should intensify efforts to inculcate in the young and elderly alike virtues that will uphold good governance. Young Kenyans should be made to clearly understand the awful side effects of dovetailing with corruption. The fact that ill-gotten wealth and shortcuts are a sure recipe for disaster should be impressed upon Kenyans, with renewed vigour.

Meanwhile those found guilty of aiding and abetting graft should face the full force of the law. There should be no sacred cows in the fight against sleaze. This is the only way to rid our country of this arch enemy of progress.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on November 12,2011

AU Summit was a waste of time and money

Even before African leaders started arriving in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia to celebrate the continent's 50th anniversary and deliberate on other 'pressing' issues last week, there was widespread cynicism that nothing worth writing home about will come out of the meeting.

 And true to this skepticism, the big men and women of Africa did not disappoint. They were in their true form; discussing non-issues while relegating what should have been uppermost on their agenda to the gutters. First to confirm our fears was Uganda's strongman Yoweri Kaguta Museveni.

If I were to summarise Museveni's conduct at the just ended AU Summit in Addis Ababa and in the recent past, I wouldn't hesitate to describe him as the proverbial mourner who mourns with an intensity that far surpasses that of the bereaved. It is a well known fact that Kenya's President Uhuru Kenyatta, his deputy William Ruto and journalist Joshua Sang have been indicted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. This indictment, as anyone with the slightest knowledge of law would tell you, does not mean the three gentlemen are guilty. They remain innocent until proved otherwise. It is in recognition of this fact that, they have been afforded a trial before the court to prove their innocence.

In their comments on the charges facing them at the ICC, Uhuru and Ruto have been insistent that they are wrongly before the court and it is just a matter of time before their innocence is established. I have no reason to doubt them considering that they have both displayed an unwavering willingness to cooperate with the court. And in view of the pair's cooperation with the court, the ICC has been fairly magnanimous, readily capitulating to most of their requests and even chastising the court's Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda each time she appears to be acting in a manner prejudicial to the Kenyan suspects.

Actually in laying the ground for trial, the court's judges have done nothing to make anyone conclude that they are impelled by the slightest modicum of malice in adjudicating the Kenyan cases. Yet Museveni rather than delve into maladies afflicting Africa such as substandard leadership, poverty among others, choose to make alarmist sentiments at the AU Summit to the effect that the ICC has plans to detain President Kenyatta when he appears before it. The question that should be on the minds of many is, why is Museveni, a Ugandan, behaving as if he is bound to suffer more than Kenyans if President Uhuru is to be tried by the ICC?

I have a feeling that there's more than meets the eye to Museveni's offensive against the ICC in regard to Kenyan cases. The Ugandan president is certainly alive to the fact that if President Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy William Ruto were to defy the ICC, Kenya would, as a matter of course, be slapped with economic sanctions by the international community. Western nations and donors will, in all likelihood, shun Kenya and freeze aid to the country. This would adversely affect the Kenyan economy. The revenue Kenya gets from international business will dry up since we will not be able to export goods and services to places like Europe and the US.

A weak Kenyan economy will a blessing in disguise for neighbouring countries like Museveni's Uganda who have never hidden their envy of Kenya's fairly stable and improving economy. Their volume of trade with Kenya's traditional trade partners will increase translating into massive economic gain for these neighbouring countries. Taking a cue from Museveni, African leaders almost unanimously voted to have the Kenyan cases at the ICC brought back to local courts.

The leaders went to stupendous extents in discrediting the ICC as an institution that unjustly targets African leaders. What they forgot to point out is that of all the continents, it is Africa that has no shortage of despots. Many African leaders are a law unto themselves. Their indifference to the rule of law and second opinion is in a class of its own. Many run their countries like personal property.

President Kenyatta belongs to a new breed of young, dynamic African leaders on whom so many young people have pegged their hopes for a better future. He represents the dreams and aspirations of youth who are sick and tired of mediocre leadership that has for far too long massacred their vision of a better life.

Conversely, Museveni is affiliated to a group of African dictators who are largely to blame for much that is wrong in Africa. He is the quintessential African despot who believes the presidency of Uganda is his birthright. How else do you describe a man who is reportedly busy grooming his son to take over the leadership of his country when he vacates office. President Kenyatta should guard against taking advice from Museveni and his ilk. I'm sure Kenyatta has a vision for this country which he's keen on ensuring that it materialises. Listening to dictators famed for oppressing their people and have no regard for the rule of law will certainly not be wise.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on June 8,2013

Leaders should keep a low profile

There are seminal things for which countries, the world over, are known and acclaimed. Each time a certain country is mentioned the minds of listeners quickly go to these peculiar features which sets a country apart from the pack.

Kenya, for instance, is acclaimed for the prowess of its athletes. The sterling performance of our athletes on the international stage inspires awe and trepidation in equal measure. America is famed for its mind-boggling technological advancements, a terribly frightening arsenal of weapons and a plethora of many other things.

It is, nonetheless, not just the good things that people remember about a country. There are also unsavoury things that nearly all countries are known for. One of the things that is increasingly becoming part of Kenya's identity is an astounding and infuriating failure by the Kenyan leadership to learn from its past mistakes. We have this strange knack of doing the same thing repeatedly yet expect to get a different result, a phenomenon that Einstein described as insanity.

Nothing authenticates this fact more than the ICC case that has seen four prominent Kenyans indicted. When debate started for the Kenyan cases to be taken up by the ICC some of the suspects thought it a pipe dream that could never come to fruition. They dismissed the ICC process as a non-starter that would take forever before considering the Kenyan case. They spared no opportunity to besmirch and lambast the ICC prosecutor and even the entire court. With a delusional sense of self importance and urged on by their narrow-minded minions they could hardly come to terms with the thought of being hauled before any court, least of all the ICC, to answer for their alleged misdeeds.

But as fate would have it the world's attention is now riveted on Kenya as some of her prominent sons take their place in the proverbial hall of ignominy. The chest thumping and ostentatious attitude of some of the suspects prior to the confirmation of the charges against them and even during the confirmation hearings may be one of the reasons why their cases are proceeding to full trial. Judges, notwithstanding their lofty status in society, are not immune to human prejudices. Each time they feel pushed in a corner, they certainly push back with disastrous ramifications.

For anyone appearing before a court of law, deference is not an option but a must if you want all to be be well with you. Suspended Industrialisation minister Henry Kosgey and postmaster general Hussein Ali were clearly alive to this truism. Prior to the confirmation hearings and even after the hearings the two gentlemen displayed humility. They shunned cheap publicity and restrained themselves from appearing snobbish and invincible. Their deference to the court and the judges was not in question. Their co-accused put up a show of might including holding a political rally to boot on their return home after the confirmation hearings. Kosgey and Ali quietly came back home and retreated to their abodes. Is it a surprise that charges against the two were dropped? One would surely expect our leaders to learn from this and jettison their penchant for unnecessary publicity.

Hardly a week after confirmation of charges against the four, a substantial number of our leaders, including some of the suspects and no less than the Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka, are crisscrossing the country under the guise of holding prayers and preaching peace. These meetings have nothing to do with prayers but everything to do with politics of revenge. Speakers at these meetings are leaving nothing to chance in hurling invective after invective at their real and imaginary adversaries including the ICC. What they forget is that their indignant and arrogant utterances will surely find their way to the ICC judges who are poised to take over the Kenyan cases from the Pre-Trial Chamber.

Our leaders had better learn the worth of taking a low profile. Appearing haughty and discourteous only serves to enrage judges— something which will not be to the suspect’s liking.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on February 1,2012

Ethnic chiefs are to blame for our woes

Some of the old biblical narratives provide a useful perspective on leadership, both in terms of the curse of failures in leadership and the benefits which successful leaders bring to their people. The biblical books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy and Joshua, for example, - collectively referred to in theological circles as the Pentateuch - say much in regard to the Children of Israel: their stupendous emancipation from captivity in Egypt; their eventful 40 years of sojourn in the wilderness; and their subsequent settling in the promised land.

Defamation law needs to be reviewed

Right from the inception of time, the need for clearly defined laws to govern man’s existence and his relationship with all around him has never been in dispute. We all agree that fidelity to the law is the surest pathway to an orderly and harmonious society. It is to the law that the society turns to even the scales of justice whenever they are disturbed.

African despots and their dalliance with the ridiculous

The stories of African despots and their penchant for the ludicrous are as amusing as they are revolting. One can hardly fail to marvel at the madness and sheer ineptitude that characterised the leadership of some of the early African leaders who took over from the colonial authorities in the late 1950s, 1960s and early 1970s.

Notable among this crop of leaders was Ghana’s Kwame Nkrumah. On February 12, 1951 Nkrumah was released from James Fort Prison in Accra after serving 14 months for engaging in what the British termed as subversive activities. His party, the Convention People’s Party, had just won 34 out of the 38 contested Parliamentary seats in an election held in that year. Like the biblical Joseph who went straight from prison to the throne in Egypt, Nkrumah leaped from convict to Prime Minister in a record one day.

The Kenyan Parliament should be sensitive to the needs of others

House Speaker Kenneth Marende is arguably one of the few political leaders that a substantial portion of Kenyans hold in high esteem. Few will refute the fact that Marende has gone about discharging his duties with remarkable resilience, rare candor and a refreshing sense of focus.

Kenyans would recall that soon after the coalition government, consisting of ODM and PNU, was constituted on February 28, 2008, President Kibaki wrote to Speaker Marende proposing Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka as his choice for the powerful post of Leader of Government Business in the House. Shortly thereafter, Prime Minister Raila Odinga nominated himself as Leader of Government Business setting the stage for an epic battle. With the two sides of the government taking divergent positions in regard to the leadership of this crucial parliamentary committee, business in the House almost came to a screeching halt.

Is Kenya ready to face the consequences of a Uhuru presidency?

In three months time, Kenyans will troop to polling stations to vote in the first general election under the new constitution that was promulgated in 2010. But even as as the polls draw close, a key issue that has been uppermost on the minds of a substantial number of Kenyans is the candidature of Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Eldoret North MP William Ruto.

The two, who have been indicted by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity, have been adamant that their names will be on the ballot, the charges levelled against them notwithstanding. And to demonstrate their seriousness, their parties, The National Alliance party, United Republican Party and Deputy Prime Minister Musalia Mudavadi's United Democratic Front party, have just signed an agreement that will see Uhuru or Mudavadi gun for the presidency while Ruto will be the running mate.

How parliament diluted the gains of the new constitution

When the new constitution was enacted and subsequently promulgated on August 27, 2010, Kenyans heaved a sigh of relief. A sense of achievement and rare patriotism pervaded every corner of the country. The air was pregnant with jubilation and optimism.

Having been passed by 67 per cent of Kenyans at the referendum held on August 4, 2010 the popularity of the new law was not in dispute. Even the few Kenyans who had opposed the plebiscite could not help but join in the celebration. It was as if we had just crossed the proverbial Rubicon into a land flowing with good governance and fidelity to the rule of law.

 The enthusiasm with which Kenyans treated the passage of the country's fundamental law could largely be attributed to the struggles that had, for unduly long, characterised the fight for good governance. The centralisation of power that the old constitution entrenched had become a source of great distress to the vast majority of Kenyans. With an imperial president who wielded overwhelming powers and could scarcely be faulted, running of the government had been reduced to a one man show to the chagrin of many Kenyans.

 Moreover a significant number of Kenyans had paid dearly, some with their lives, in the fight for a new liberal constitution. Good governance and fidelity to the rule of law became the rallying call as gallant sons and daughters of our soil did battle with security forces deployed to quell any opposition to the powers that be. After a long-drawn battle the Kanu government capitulated to the demands of Kenyans and constituted the Constitution of Kenya Review Commission under the stewardship of Prof Yash Pal Ghai. This Commission went round the country collecting and collating the views of Kenyans on matters constitutional.

Most of these views were encapsulated in the “Bomas Draft” which was later on watered down by some powerful forces around the presidency virulently opposed to reforms. These anti-reformists came up with the “Wako Draft” but when they tried to ram it down the throats of Kenyans in a referendum held in 2005, Kenyans overwhelmingly voted against the draft. From bad to worse But with a new constitution in 2010, reputed as one of the most liberal in the world and which was considered a harbinger for sound governance and fidelity to the rule of law, Kenyans had every reason to rejoice and look forward to better days. A cursory look at what has transpired two years down the line, nonetheless, paints a somewhat distressing picture. Apart from the Judiciary which has undergone significant reforms courtesy of the new constitution, the other branches of government have remained largely unchanged.

One might even argue that they have gone from bad to worse. Parliament and the Executive seem to have conspired to dilute the constitution and make the Kenyan dream of constitutionalism a mirage. Take the Leadership and Integrity Act recently passed by Parliament. This is the statute that operationalises chapter six of the constitution on leadership and integrity.

Sick and tired of leadership that gave the crucial issue of integrity short shrift, Kenyans expected Parliament to enact a watertight statute that would ensure that only men and women of integrity were elected and appointed to public office. Contrary to this anticipation the Leadership and Integrity Act makes nonsense of chapter six of the constitution. The statute, as drafted, leaves room for crooks and outlaws to still find their way into public office. It should therefore not strike us as surprising that we have people indicted for crimes against humanity vying for the presidency and deputy presidency respectively. Others are lining up to be voted into office as governors, senators and MPs. Semblance of discipline and decorum By the same token, the Political Parties Act was expected to restore some semblance of discipline and decorum in Kenyan politics. Kenyans looked forward to a law that would consign party hopping and other forms of political malpractices to history.

But keen on securing their own parochial and selfish political interests MPs enacted a law that entertains and even endorses these malpractices. Then came the Retirement Benefits (Deputy President and Designated State Officers) Bill and the Presidential Retirement Benefits Amendment Bill 2013. Had the Retirement Benefits (Deputy President and Designated State Officers) Bill been assented to by President Mwai Kibaki it would have seen the Prime Minister, Vice President, MPs and other designated state officers take home millions of shillings each as retirement benefits. Even though article 230(4) (a) of the constitution vests the responsibility of setting the salaries and benefits of state officers, including the President and MPs, with the Salaries and Remuneration Commission, Parliament went ahead, in total defiance of the constitution, and passed this law without consulting the commission. Retirement Package And as if to demonstrate his own averseness to clear provisions of the law and sanction Parliament’s violation of the constitution, President Kibaki signed the Presidential Retirement Benefits Amendment Bill 2013 into law. He is now guaranteed of a retirement package of Sh25.2 million and other allowances running into millions of shillings monthly.

This is beside a new residence put up at a cost of Sh500 million on a 1,000 acre farm near Mweiga town on the Nyeri-Nyahururu Highway to which President Kibaki will retire. Surprisingly it is not just the country’s leadership that appears keen to flout the law and still get away with it. If what happened during the recent party nominations is anything to go by, it is no exaggeration to conclude that even ordinary Kenyans have no regard for the values espoused by the new constitution. Many consider it a piece of paper that should not stand in anyone's way. Rather than conduct themselves honourably by sorting out their grievances against each other using the channels provided by the law and graciously accepting defeat many resorted to hurling insults at their perceived adversaries and fighting.

In view of the aforegoing, questions are beginning to emerge as to whether Kenyans and their leaders are keen on implementing the constitution and other subsidiary laws. That President Kibaki still signed into law a bill that even the chief legal adviser to the government admitted was not constitutional, bearing in mind that there was no input from the Salaries and Remuneration Commission, is worrying indeed. The message that this gesture sends out is that as long as it suits one, he or she can disregard the law and still get away with it.

In many democracies, the world over, the constitution ranks above all other laws. Kenya is no exception, at least in word. Article 2(4) of the constitution renders invalid any law, including customary law, and conduct that is inconsistent with the constitution to the extent of its inconsistency. Instead of upholding this clear stipulation of the supreme law, Kenyans have been treated to the awful spectre of Parliament legislating laws that are diametrically opposed to the constitution. Their hopes that the President will be audacious enough and say no to these unconstitutional laws have been dashed as he sees nothing wrong with assenting to some of these laws even when the commission charged with the responsibility of overseeing the implementation of the constitution advises otherwise.

 Could it be that despite having an admittedly progressive constitution, Kenya is gradually sliding back to the days when the law of the jungle reigned supreme? Is there any hope that the next government will redeem the country from this downward spiral into lawlessness? Only time will tell.

This article was published on January 19,2013

The collapse of Kenyan dynasties

Political dynasties are a well known feature the world over. These are families that have straddled the political landscape of their countries like colossi confounding friend and foe alike. Their names have become synonymous with the leadership of their respective countries. For instance, the United States of America has the Kennedy and George Bush dynasties, Botswana has the Khamas, Gabon has the Bongos while Kenya has the Kenyattas, the Odingas, the Mois, the Kibaki's among others.

 The patriarchs and scions of these families have, at one point or another, ascended to notable positions. The mention of their names evokes mixed reactions. Those who love them love them passionately while those who detest them hate them in equal measure. The Odingas That Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, famously referred to as the doyen of multi-party democracy in Kenya, wielded influence of almost mythical proportions in his native Luo Nyanza is not in doubt.

To the vast majority of the people of Luo Nyanza, Jaramogi was a political messiah whose leadership credentials were beyond reproach. He was regarded as a leader who subscribed to the noblest of ideals and was actuated by nothing but the best interests of his people. His word carried immense weight and those who dared challenge his supremacy in the politics of Luo Nyanza lived to rue their decisions. Tales abound of how Jaramogi, whenever he wanted anyone elected to a position of leadership, could just 'send greetings' and the election of such an individual was a foregone conclusion. His preferences were the preferences of his people and once he took a position, the rest had no option but to toe the line. Those who defied him were branded traitors. And true to the expectations of his people, Jaramogi did not disappoint. When Kenya became a Republic in 1964, Jaramogi was appointed the country's first vice president.

But as the VP, Jaramogi differed with President Jomo Kenyatta. His leaning towards the East rubbed Kenyatta and his henchmen the wrong way. He also took great exception to corruption in the Kenyatta regime setting him on a collision course with the president. He resigned in 1966 and formed his own political party, the Kenya People's Union. In his letter of resignation to Kenyatta, Jaramogi wrote, “You have not given any consideration to me as your number 2 in State matters. I have a conscience and this in fact does prick me when I earn public money but with no job to do. I consider this a waste of public money and I am worried lest the future generation questions my sincerity, when they would learn that I allowed myself to hold a sinecure post in the midst of poverty and misery in our country. With this realization, I cannot continue to hold this position any longer and I hereby tender my resignation.”

 The friction between Jaramogi and Kenyatta came to a head when Kenyatta went to preside over the opening of the Nyanza Provincial General Hospital which had been constructed in partnership with the Russian government. The two independence leaders launched a litany of accusations directed at each other. Chaos erupted when a crowd attempted to stone the president’s motorcade. Kenyatta's security detail opened fire killing 11 people and injuring scores in the riots that ensued. Jaramogi was arrested and detained for two years. He was consigned to political oblivion until 1978 when Kenyatta passed on. Yet even in detention, Jaramogi’s influence in the politics of Luo Nyanza never waned. It continued to increase in leaps and bounds. Emboldened by Kenyatta’s exit from the political stage and the unwavering support he was accorded by his people, Jaramogi continued to agitate for multi-party democracy until his death in 1994. Upon his death, his second-born son Raila Odinga, currently serving as Kenya's Prime Minister, took over the leadership mantle from his father.

Like Jaramogi, Raila has kept a tight grip on the politics of Luo Nyanza ever since. Apart from Lands minister James Orengo who was elected to Parliament in 1997 after defying Raila and vying on a Ford Kenya ticket, no other person seen as anti-Raila has ever been elected to Parliament in Luo Nyanza. Come 2002 Orengo was not lucky. His anti-Raila stance cost him his Ugenya Parliamentary seat banishing him into the political cold for five years. It is only after he reconciled with Raila that Orengo was able to clinch the Ugenya parliamentary seat in the 2007 general election.

 Apart from Raila another of Jaramogi’s son, Dr Oburu Odinga has for 19 years served as the MP for Bondo. Raila’s sister Dr Wenwa Akinyi Odinga is an academic currently serving as a diplomat in the US. The Kenyattas Then there is the Kenyatta dynasty. Kenyatta was Kenya’s founding president. He is reputed as a forceful and no nonsense leader who brooked no dissent. His descendants held and still hold positions of consequence in both the public and private sectors.

Notable among these is his son Uhuru Kenyatta who is vying for the presidency in the March 4 general election. He has held the position of MP, minister and is presently serving as the Deputy Prime Minister. Muhoho Kenyatta, another of Kenyatta’s sons, is a savvy businessman sitting atop the family’s vast business empire. Ngegi Muigai, a nephew of Jomo Kenyatta, inherited the Gatundu South parliamentary seat when Mzee passed on. Another son of Kenyatta, Peter Kenyatta once served as an assistant minister and MP for Juja. Among Kenyatta's daughters, Margaret Kenyatta is perhaps the most prominent. She was the first African woman mayor of Nairobi between 1970 and 1976. She also served as Kenya's ambassador to the United Nations from 1976 to 1986.

There is also Beth Mugo who is the late Kenyatta’s niece and is serving as the Minister for Public Health. George Muhoho, a brother-in-law of Kenyatta, served as a cabinet minister in the Moi regime. He also worked as the managing director of Kenya Airports Authority, one of the most lucrative parastatals. He is considered a close ally of President Kibaki and a member of his kitchen cabinet. Kenyatta's physician, Dr Njoroge Mungai was an influential minister and a member of his kitchen cabinet. These are just but a few of the people close to Kenyatta who rose to positions of influence. The Mois Former President Moi took over from Kenyatta in 1978 and went on to build his own political dynasty.

For the 24 years he served as Kenya’s Head of State, Moi, despite his low level of education, distinguished himself as an astute leader and a ruthless political schemer. He was always ahead of his political adversaries earning the moniker, “the professor of politics”. When he unceremoniously vacated the political scene after serving for almost two and a half decades, his son Gideon Moi inherited his Baringo Central parliamentary seat. What, however, stands out about Moi, is that during his reign as independent Kenya's second president none of his children dabbled into active politics. It is only after his exit from office that his children sought elective posts. But anyone who curried favour with Moi reaped pleasantly from the relationship with the former president.

 One person who benefited enormously from Moi's magnanimity was former cabinet minister and Mathioya MP Joseph Kamotho. Even though Kamotho was never elected in his native Mathioya, Moi consistently nominated him to Parliament and ensured that he was appointed to key ministries. Former nominated MP Mark Too also gained hugely from his relationship with Moi. He was appointed as the chairman of the Lonrho Group of Companies and was later nominated to Parliament. Too is said to have been so close to Moi that all that anyone who wanted favours from the former president needed to do was to seek audience with Too and he could count the mission accomplished.

Be that as it may, the just ended political party nominations and other recent political events have left many wondering whether the Kenyan political dynasties are on their deathbed. Despite the mythical grip that Jaramogi’s family has kept on the politics of Luo Nyanza, his first born son, Dr Oburu Odinga lost his bid to vie for Siaya senator on a Coalition for Reforms and Democracy ticket. This is something that could never have been thought of before. Though the nominations were marred with violence and claims of rigging, it is widely believed that new comer William Oduol floored Dr Oburu in the nominations. The Cord ticket has since been given to another contestant following the conflict between Dr Oburu and Oduol. Another scion of Jaramogi and sister to Prime Minister Raila Odinga, Ruth Odinga, who had expressed interest in becoming the first governor of Kisumu has also bowed out of the race following a bitter dispute as to who between her and Jack Ranguma won the Cord ticket. Jakoyo Midiwo, a first cousin of Raila got a direct nomination even after being beaten by a new comer Elisha Odhiambo.

Allies of Raila such as outgoing Rangwe MP Martin Ogindo, immediate Nyakach MP Pollyns Ochieng, Alago Oluoch among others were also floored in the nominations by new comers. From the Kenyatta family Public Health minister, Beth Mugo announced, just before the nominations, that she would not vie for Nairobi senator as it had earlier on been expected. Even though she attributed her decision to advice from doctors treating her for cancer, speculation was rife that she sensed defeat and thus decided to honourably bow out of the race.

 The Moi dynasty has also had its own share of political beatings. In 2007 voters in Baringo Central resoundingly voted his son Gideon out of Parliament. Moi’s other sons, Raymond and Jonathan were overwhelmingly rejected by voters in Rongai and Eldama Ravine constituencies respectively. There are even doubts as to whether Gideon’s bid for Baringo senator in the March 4 polls will avail in the face of the United Republican Party wave that is sweeping across Rift Valley province. Moi's attempt to impose Uhuru Kenyatta on Kenyans as president in 2002 also hit a snag when the National Rainbow Coalition led by Mwai Kibaki swept into office. Meanwhile in Othaya, President Kibaki’s constituency, acrimony is brewing over the The National Alliance Party nominations.

Prior to the party primaries, the Kibaki family had expressed its support for Mugambi Gichuki to take over from the president as the MP for Othaya. Kibaki’s son Jimi Kibaki even visited Othaya in the company of Mugambi and revealed that he had held discussions with the President, Jubilee coalition presidential candidate Uhuru Kenyatta and they were all agreed that Mugambi should succeed President Kibaki as the area MP. But when the nominations were held, flamboyant Othaya political activist and businesswoman Mary Wambui won the TNA ticket, touching off a political storm that has captured the attention of many and sucked in President Kibaki's son Jimi Kibaki. Wambui has accused Jimi and other powerful forces of scheming to deny her the TNA ticket for the Othaya parliamentary seat.

What is, nonetheless, worthy of note is that despite his immense influence as the president, the people of Othaya whom he has served for more than 30 years as MP, have defied President Kibaki and nominated someone other than his preferred successor. These latest developments have brought the existence of political dynasties into sharp focus. The failure by members of these prominent families and their allies to win party tickets point to a paradigm shift in Kenyan politics. The days when people with a prominent name and those affiliated to political kingpins were guaranteed of victory in political contests are swiftly paling into oblivion.

 Kenyans appear to have resolved that it is the electorate, and not political godfathers, who should choose whoever they want to serve as their leader. Those still steeped in the old way of doing things are in for a rude shock. There is a new dawn in Kenya. A dawn where meritocracy rather than ethnic affiliations are the key considerations is electing leaders to public office.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper of January 26,2013

Probe rigging claims and threats against CJ

Just before the infamous 2007 general election, the then opposition party, the Orange Democratic Movement raised alarm that plans were underway by the then government to rig elections. The media was replete with stories of how the provincial administration was doing President Kibaki's bidding as the country geared towards the polls. In Homa Bay some Administration Police officers who were alleged to have been sent to the area to aid in rigging were killed by an angry mob. Yet in the face of all these allegations, key government officers denied that there were such plans. Warnings from the National Security Intelligence Service that rigging could trigger violence on a massive scale were overlooked. The scenario that played out then seems to be repeating itself as Kenya hurtles towards the first general election under a new constitution.

The Coalition for Reforms and Democracy presidential candidate Raila Odinga and his running mate Kalonzo Musyoka have gone public and accused the Head of Public Service Francis Kimemia, National Intelligence Service Director General Michael Gichangi and Chief of Kenya Defence Forces General Julius Karangi of working in cahoots with the Jubilee coalition to rig the March 4 polls. Raila is accusing the trio of holding secret meetings aimed at coercing those working under them to campaign for the Jubilee coalition. These are no light allegations especially in view of the mess the country was plunged into following the contested 2007 general election. One would expect senior public officers to have learned from their past mistakes but sadly that seems not to be the case. It is business as usual and the future of the country and the well being of Kenyans is least of their concerns.

When United States Under Secretary of State in charge of African Affairs Johnnie Carson released a statement warning that even though the choice of who should lead Kenyans rested with Kenyans, "choices have consequences, individuals have reputations and their reputations follow them," Head of Public Service Francis Kimemia came out strongly to dismiss Carson. Kimemia said he believed Obama more than Carson. This reaction by Kimemia clearly painted him as a Jubilee coalition sympathiser, a position that is diametrically opposed to the stipulations of the Public Officer Ethics Act. Section 16 of the said Act states thus, " A public officer shall not, in or in connection with the performance of his duties as such - (a) act as an agent for, or so as to further the interest of, a political party; or (b) indicate support for or opposition to any political party or candidate in an election. A public officer shall not engage in political activity that may compromise or be seen to compromise the political neutrality of his office."

 Kimemia is certainly alive to this provision. He also knows that in politics, perceptions are everything and as a key public officer his neutrality in politics should not be in question. The reason as to why he sees no fault in carrying himself in a manner that puts his neutrality in question remains unclear. On the heels of these chilling allegations by Cord, Chief Justice Willy Mutunga released a statement on Wednesday in which he revealed that attempts had been made by an immigration officer under the instructions of Kimemia to stop him from travelling to Tanzania.

On arrival in Tanzania, National Intelligence Service chief Michael Gichangi called Dr Mutunga to apologise over the "small hiccup" at the airport. This is unprecedented given the obscurity with which the NIS should go about doing its job. The mention of Kimemia and Gichangi in all these leaves more questions than answers. Dr Mutunga heads the Judiciary, one of the three arms of government and perhaps the most important of all. In terms of seniority, he's far much above Kimemia.

The thought of getting approval from Kimemia before travelling doesn't make sense. Further, within the short time that he has been at the helm of the Judiciary, Mutunga has introduced a slew of reforms that have seen the confidence of many Kenyans in the Judiciary restored. Under the stewardship of Dr Mutunga, Kenya now boasts of a Judiciary whose commitment to justice and the rule of law can be hardly gainsaid.

This is unlike in the previous dispensation when judicial officers served as errand boys and girls of the high and mighty. Getting justice from the courts was a preserve for the rich. The phrase, "why hire a lawyer when you can buy a judge," became the defining mark of the Kenyan Judiciary. By the same token, Dr Mutunga alleged to have received a poison-pen letter from a group calling itself Mungiki Veterans Group/Kenya Sovereignty Defence Squad.

The letter warned against an adversarial ruling on the presidential and deputy presidential candidacy of Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto. "The letter extols the violent exploits of the Mungiki movement and threatens dire consequence," Mutunga said. This smacks of an attempt to take the country back to the dark old days. Apparently there are powerful forces in this country who are inextricably wedded to the status quo and are determined to scuttle any efforts to reform the system. With a legislature whose propensity to look after its own interests is second to none and an executive virulently opposed to reforms, the hope of this country lies in the Judiciary.

Indeed Kenyans have watched with immense pride as the Judiciary reversed some unconstitutional appointments made by the Executive and the Legislature. This is something that could hardly be imagined just a few years ago. The threats to Dr Mutunga and judges should be thoroughly investigated and the perpetrators swiftly brought to book. The fact that a number of judges have in the recent past been attacked should jolt security organs into action.

Director of Public Prosecutions Keriako Tobiko has directed the Inspector General of Police David Kimaiyo to investigate the threats against Justice Mutunga and other judges. This is welcome. Kenyans will, however, be watching to see whether the police will decisively act on this.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on February 23,2013

We should perhaps rotate the presidency to reduce tension

President Mwai Kibaki is set to retire after being in public service for half a century. To be fair to Kibaki, his service to the Kenyan people has been impressive. In nearly all the positions he has served, Kibaki has done pretty well. When the history of Kenya is finally penned down, Kibaki will most certainly take pride of place as one of the greatest sons of Kenya. But of all his achievements, the constitution which was promulgated under his watch in 2010 stands out.

 It will be remembered that the agitation for a new constitution kicked off way back in the early 1990s. Well heeled proponents of the status quo, however, ensured that attempts to enact a new and progressive constitution consistently came a cropper. Those who advocated for the new supreme law became marked men and women. Untold torture and state sanctioned violence was unleashed on such. Some were even banished into exile and branded renegades.

The Luhya have set a good precedent

Political discourses in Africa seldom end without allusion to some of the social ills gripping the continent. Whenever two or more Africans engage in a political discourse, their discussion will sooner or later veer off into a litany of vices such as sleaze, negative ethnicity, impunity among others.

Take Kenya for instance. Right from the time the country gained independence from her colonial masters, ethnicity has been the pervasive feature of Kenyan politics. Ethnic numbers dictate who wins or loses an election. In fact anyone who doesn't trace his roots to one of the big five communities ie the Kikuyu, Luyha, Luo, Kalenjin and Kamba, has almost nil prospects of becoming the country's president. This is the unsavoury truth, however much we dislike it. True, we've seen politicians from diverse ethnic groups come together to craft coalitions that have gone on to win elections. But a careful examination of most of these coalitions still point to astutely concocted ethnic alliances to ascend to public office.

 Consequently the bazillion dollar question has been, how can we rid Kenyan politics of ethnic leanings and have a system like America's where politics are largely defined by policies/ideas and not ethnic considerations? But as we grapple with this question, something worthy of note happened in the the just concluded general election. After a vigorous and most tortuous campaign, many Kenyans expected the Luhya people of western Kenya to vote for Amani coalition presidential candidate Musalia Mudavadi in large numbers. Granted that he hails from the region and had combed nearly all corners of the province, it was assumed that Mudavadi was almost guaranteed of bagging the entire western vote.

 The belief was that he could then use this voting bloc to negotiate a post-election deal with either the Jubilee coalition or the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy. But this was not to be. Contrary to the expectations, the Cord candidate Raila Odinga, who is originally from the Luo community, garnered almost 70 per cent of the luhya vote. Busia, one of the counties in western province voted for Raila 88 per cent.

Even in Vihiga county where Mudavidi traces his roots, Raila got more votes than Mudavadi. This tells a story that radically departs from the ethnic connotations that have been the hallmark of Kenyan politics. It speaks of a people that seem keen on setting a pattern after which the rest of Kenyans should follow. In a way, the luhya people are telling the rest of Kenyans that there's more to leadership that leadership is not about tribe but sound policies.

There are those who have accused luhyas of betraying one of their own by voting for someone from another ethnic group. Such argue that unlike communities such as the Kikuyu, the Luo, Kalenjin among others, the Luhya are not 'united' and don't vote as a bloc. This accusation, however, ignores the big picture. It is a contradiction in terms in the sense that while we are decrying the high levels of negative ethnicity afflicting Kenyan politics, we are quick to pillory and denounce any efforts to rid our politics of tribalism. This is unfortunate indeed.

 Others may want to argue that Luhya's knew that Mudavadi had no chance of posting impressive results in the presidential contest and this is why they decided to cast their lot with Raila who appeared poised for an outright win. Nothing could be further from the truth. In 2007, the Kamba people of Eastern province knew that Kalonzo Musyoka could not win the presidency. It was apparent that President Kibaki and Raila Odinga were the frontrunners. But the Kamba still went ahead and voted for Kalonzo to the last man. Nothing other than the fact that Kalonzo comes from the community informed this voting pattern by the Kamba.

The message the luhya are sending to the rest of the country is that time for politics of negative ethnicity is up. They are making it clear that it is the height of self deception to decry the high levels of tribal politics in our country and still go on to vote for someone, not on the basis of sound policies, but just because he or she belongs to your community. What many Kenyans appear not to have grasped is that we are in a new dispensation with a constitution that makes a strong case for equal distribution of national resources.

Unlike in the previous dispensation when skewed development of the country was the thing in vogue for the powers that be, occupants of public office can only engage in lopsided distribution of national resources to their own detriment. Not even the president can violate clear provisions of the law and get away with it. This should encourage Kenyans to vote for leaders who have a vision for the country and not ethnic barons whose only motivation is their own selfish interests.

This article was published in the Star Newspaper on March 16,2013