Parliament's move will hurt Kenyan cases at the ICC

The indictment of President Uhuru Kenyatta, Deputy President William Ruto and Journalist Joshua Sang by the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity is a matter that has been at the centre of Kenyan politics for quite a while. Hardly a day goes without the imminent trial of the three Kenyans in The Hague being talked about.

Suffice it to note that Uhuru and Ruto are presently the country's top leaders. The interest their impending trial has touched off is therefore quite understandable, even in order. But in what I can only term as an attempt to discredit the Hague-based court, Parliament has been recalled to discuss a Bill by the National Assembly Majority Leader Adan Duale to pull Kenya out of the Rome Statute.

In vouching for his Bill, Duale argues that with the commencement of the trial, it is not so much the interests of Uhuru and Ruto that are at stake but the sovereignty of Kenya. Duale further argues that his Bill has nothing to do with the case facing Uhuru, Ruto and Sang. The question that Duale should, nonetheless, answer is, why did he not introduce this Bill long before the start of the trials? Few Kenyans, if any, are convinced that Parliament's move to reconvene has anything to do with the sovereignty of the country.

Be that as it may, Parliament should not lose sight of the fact the Kenyan cases at the ICC are at an advanced stage and any attempt to scuttle them is an exercise in futility. To start with withdrawal from the Rome Statute is not a moment's affair. A state party keen on pulling out of the statute has to write to the UN Secretary General notifying him of its intentions. It will then take a whole year before the withdrawal is effected. Ongoing cases are, however, not affected by withdrawal. They must, of necessity, run their full course.

At the same time, Parliament's move amounts to an illegality. As per the provisions of the Treaty Making and Ratification Act of 2012, it is the Cabinet and not Parliament that should initiate the withdrawal of Kenya from international treaties to which it is a party. Section 17(1) of the said Act stipulates that, "Where Kenya wishes withdraw from a treaty, the relevant Cabinet Secretary shall prepare a cabinet memorandum indicating the reasons for such an intention".

In line with the provisions of this statute, the person mandated to initiate the process of withdrawal from a treaty is the Attorney General. He has to do this by drafting a memorandum and tabling it before Cabinet for deliberation and approval. After the Bill is discussed and approved by the Cabinet, it should then be forwarded to Parliament, both the National Assembly and the Senate, for debate. Parliament may pass or reject the draft Bill.

One therefore fails to understand why the National Assembly Majority Leader is arrogating himself powers that he doesn't have. Perhaps it is the zeal to endear himself to the President and his deputy that is propelling Duale. The MP should, however, be reminded that rather than help Uhuru and Ruto, his action may harm their case at the ICC.

Those familiar with the operations of courts of law, the world over, will tell you that nothing infuriates judicial officers more than casting improper motives on their court(s). In referring to the ICC as an instrument being used by western countries to punish their perceived enemies, Duale and his colleagues are consciously or unconsciously disparaging the judges serving in this court, some of whom will be presiding over the Kenyan cases. Judges are as human as anyone of us and to assume that they are wholly impervious to conventional human prejudices is far from the truth. For anyone appearing before a court of law and keen to draw the mercy of the judicial officers, deference to the court is not an option but a must. In the Kenyan case, matters are not made any better by the fact that Uhuru and Ruto are doing nothing to stop their lieutenants from treading this dangerous path.

It should also be clear to legislators that their move to withdraw from the Rome Statute paints Kenya in a very bad light. The message this sends out is that while the rest of the world is doing everything within its ability to bid farewell to impunity, Kenya is one of those few countries that are inextricably wedded to impunity. The Kenyan Parliament is telling the world that the high and mighty can do no wrong and hauling them before a court of law is unorthodox and reprehensible.

Uhuru and Ruto have maintained that they are wrongly before the court and it is just a matter of time before they are acquitted. The law also presumes them innocent until proven otherwise. Luckily the ICC, contrary to what MPs would have us believe, is a patently impartial court whose key motivation nothing but justice. Kenyan MPs should stop behaving badly. To paraphrase the late Nigerian literary icon Chinua Achebe, there's nothing noble in mourning more than the bereaved.

Imprudent use of public funds is Kenya's undoing

President Uhuru Kenyatta flew back into the country last Tuesday after what has been billed as a massively successful trip to Russia and China. The President's engagement with the Chinese is particularly worthy of note granted the billions of shillings Beijing has extended to Kenya for investment in various projects aimed at improving the economy.

News of this funding has touched off so much ecstasy among a section of Kenyans with some commentators describing the president's move as a feat unrivaled in its magnitude and reach. This jubilation is, however, in my view, misplaced and largely springs from a misapprehension of facts. What appears to have escaped the attention of many is that the Sh425 billion is a loan and not a grant.

Before China extended this loan to Kenya, our national debt stood at Sh1.9 trillion or thereabout. With the additional Sh425 billion from China, the debt has moved to Sh2.3 trillion. It is true that if the Sh425 billion will be put to the intended use, Kenya is bound to reap pleasantly. Our dilapidated infrastructure will certainly receive a serious face-lift. The standards of living for a significant number of Kenyans will in all likelihood improve.

But if recent developments in regard to handling of public funds are anything to go by, Kenyans have more than enough reasons to worry that a substantial portion of the funds from China may as well find their way into a few privileged individual pockets. Cases of financial malpractice among people holding public office have been on the increase.

The Judicial Service Commission's recent move to send the Judiciary's Chief Registrar Gladys Boss Shollei on compulsory leave has brought to the fore information hitherto unknown to many. Kenyans have, for instance, learned with a measure of incredulity that members of the Judicial Service Commission, who are allegedly serving on part time basis, take home as much as Sh1.6 million a month. Last year, the JSC reportedly held 247 meetings, with each commissioner earning Sh80,000 in allowances per meeting.

Not long ago, one of the commissioners, now famed for his arrogance and delusional sense of importance, penned an article in a leading Sunday newspaper in which he poured cold water on constitutional commissions terming them as an unnecessary burden to the taxpayer. He went on to suggest that, like the JSC, the commissioners in the numerous constitutional commissions should serve on part time basis and should be reduced to a bear minimum. This, according to him, would cut down on the costs of running them and save funds to be utilised on other pressing issues. It is almost unbelievable that this same commissioner who is allegedly serving on part time basis may be earning more than what commissioners serving on full time basis take home at the end of the month.

On the heels of the profligacy obtaining in the JSC, Kenya's notoriously rapacious legislators are again scheming to push their monthly pay upwards. Plans are underway to amend Article 260 of the constitution to exclude MPs from the definition of state officers. This amendment is aimed at giving MPs a free hand in increasing their pay as and when they feel like. And even before this amendment, the legislators are already scheming to increase their monthly pay from Sh1.2 million to Sh1.4 million. In an astute move aimed at gaining support from the Judiciary and county governments, the legislators are also proposing a massive increment in the allowances paid to judges, magistrates and members of the county assemblies.

By the same token, Suba MP John Mbadi is in the process of introducing a Bill on retirement benefits for top government officials in the House. The Retirement Benefits (Deputy President and Designated State Officers) Bill 2013, if passed will see former Prime Minister Raila Odinga, former Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka and other top officials each earn between Sh49 million and Sh85 million a year in retirement perks. This amount includes what is to be spend on paying staff assigned to them and other services. Using the minimum amount, Sh49 million, to compute what these top officials will be earning monthly, it translates to about Sh4.1 million. If you take the maximum amount, Sh85 million, the monthly package comes to about Sh7.1 million.

Looking at this unmitigated extravagance, it is hard to believe that Kenya is a third world country. The question many Kenyans are asking is, where will the money to pay these salaries, allowances and retirement benefits come from? And even if we can afford to pay all these benefits what will be spend on development projects geared towards making the lives of the majority better?

My suggestion is that MPs should step back and rethink their push for more and more money. A salary and allowances totaling to Sh1.2 million a month is already too high for a country like Kenya. The government should also put in place measures to ensure that public funds are put to good use. Strictly enforcing laws that criminalise misappropriation of public funds, such as the Public Officer Ethics Act, will go a long way in curbing embezzlement of public resources.

This article was published in the Star newspaper on Saturday 31st August 2013
 

Hypocrisy and graft are the pervasive features of Kenyan politics

Jacob Juma, one of the directors of Cortec Mining company, has accused cabinet secretary Najib Balala of cancelling a licence issued to the company after being denied a bribe of Sh80 million. In a swift rejoinder, Balala has vociferously denied Juma's allegations terming them as a perfect case of 'corruption fighting back'.

I have no idea who between Juma and Balala is telling us the truth. As things presently stand, we can only await the outcome of the investigations that have been launched into the issue by the Ethics and Anti-corruption Commission, assuming they will not be bungled, before establishing the veracity or otherwise of Juma's sensational claims.

What is, nonetheless, not in dispute is that hypocrisy and giving and taking of bribes are not alien to Kenyan politics. Shady deals, involving millions of shillings, between influential politicians and leading businessmen keen on clinching lucrative government contracts and other favours are a pervasive feature of Kenyan politics. Right from the summit down to the lowest level of our politics, bribery and raw hypocrisy are part and parcel of the game.

In the early 1990s, a leading Dubai-based businessman, Nassir Ibrahim Ali arrived in Kenya keen on convincing the Kenyan government to permit him to run duty free shops at Kenya's international airports. On sharing his dream with a Mombasa-based tycoon with connections to the president, Ali was advised to pay the Head of State a courtesy call and make his offer. According to his revelations, in quasi-judicial proceedings after the deal went sour, he was, however, advised not to meet the president empty handed. Consequently, he stashed a briefcase with US$2 million and made his way to the president's residence.

On reaching the home, Ali was instructed to place the briefcase at a certain location in the compound and told to pick it from the same point on his way out. True, as he left after meeting the big man, he found the briefcase at the point where he had left it. It had, however, been emptied of the money and filled with green maize. Ali later on argued that there was nothing reprehensible with this and that his was a lawful gift to the president. But whichever way Ali or anyone else may want to look at it, this was corruption and trying to cloth it in some nice-sounding phrases does not change the fact that it is graft.

And then there is the story of former Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka. Two weeks ago, the former VP and Wiper party leader was interviewed by a leading newspaper. In the interview Kalonzo opened up on an array of issues. He, for instance, made it clear that he still has so much to offer this country and he is not just about to vacate the political stage. He also took issue with former President Mwai Kibaki for having tricked him into joining his government after the disputed 2007 general election with a promise to support his(Kalonzo's) candidature for the presidency in the 2013 general election. Kalonzo blamed the former president for having reneged on this promise.

But it is his sentiments in regard to former Prime Minister Raila Odinga and the controversial 2007 general election that exposed the hypocrisy that is the bane of Kenyan politics. Kalonzo termed Raila as 'a strong person' whose victory in the presidential race has been stolen twice. He argued that Raila won both the 2007 and 2013 general elections but he was robbed of his victory. Now, shortly after the 2007 elections, Kalonzo's party entered an alliance with President Kibaki's Party of National Unity. This saw Kalonzo appointed Vice President and two of his cronies were made ministers.

Once in office and despite the violence that was sweeping across the country like a tornado, pursuant to cries of rigging from Raila's Orange Democratic Movement, Kalonzo became the defender-in-chief of President Kibaki's 'victory'. He told anyone who cared to listen that President Kibaki had won the election and if aggrieved, ODM had the option of seeking recourse in the courts of law. When the international community moved in to help quell the raging violence and restore normalcy, Kalonzo opined that Kenyans were capable of putting their house in order and that it was too early for the international community to step in.

Yet this is the same guy who is now telling us that Raila won the 2007 elections. Why did he join the Kibaki administration as VP when, in his heart of hearts, he knew that Raila had beaten Kibaki? It is not lost to Kenyans that in the run up to the 2007 general election, Kalonzo, while on the campaign trail, repeatedly told his listeners that he will 'pass in the middle' of Raila and Kibaki. This was despite overwhelming evidence that Raila and Kibaki were the front-runners and there was no way Kalonzo could win the presidency. Was his joining an illegitimate government a validation of this promise? The inference is inescapable that even before the disputed polls, Kalonzo knew something that the rest of us didn't.

But who can blame him any way? As aforementioned, hypocrisy, wheeler-dealing, bribery and a litany of other ills are part and parcel of Kenyan politics. This is perhaps the reason why clean people can hardly survive in the filthy waters of Kenyan politics. Professor Patrice Lumumba, PLO, was indeed right in opining that there's an urgent need to introduce some hygiene in Kenyan politics.

This article was published in the Star newspaper of August 17, 2013

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