TAKING STOCK OF POLITICAL TRANSITIONS IN KENYA By ndolo asasa Esq.

Being of Kenya Kenya came into being as a modern state in 1920 or there about upon officially being colonized by the United Kingdom and thus by default joining the then massive and powerful British Empire. This marked a fundamental change on how the people of Kenya were to relate henceforth. This change occurred in the political arena, economic relationships and cultural development across the population that left the previous nation-states, read tribes, in a form and matter that would never be the same again. This change was variously resisted and or welcome all the way from the Coast, North Eastern through Eastern, Central, Nairobi, Nyanza, Rift Valley and the Western Provinces. The populace in return has not disappointed by appropriately responding to the changes as much as they have come. It is the art of moving thus by way of response from one status to another, that I here refer to as transition. The Kenyan Republic has been most shaped by the changes in governance. Some of the changes have tilted transitions while some have simply excited the existence of a situation. In my view, the following have stood out in the governance transitions in Kenya towards better or otherwise governance. a. Defining Personalities: Mr. Harry Thuku occupies that enviable position of personifying the resistance to colonialism. As much as he is alleged later to have turned collaborator of the colonialist, his action triggered what he could not singularly stop – the fight for independence. This mantle, of being the flagship of resistance to colonialism, is effectively represented by Mr. Dedan Kimathi who moved the resistance to an armed struggle level best narrated as Mau Mau resistance. This heroic narrative of making the Kenya nation is brought to an abrupt end by the entry of oneMr.Johnstone Kamau aka Jomo Kenyatta who was successfully grafted- either by himself or the British agents, onto the pinnacle of the independence struggle. This transition is not celebrated yet it is the biggest and most significant political transition from the traditional nation-states that make Kenya to the Republic of Kenya. In the traditional nation-states, the heroic warriors got the credit for their endeavours including recognition and leadership positions resultant of their efforts. But, by the Jomo Kenyatta paradigm shift, that the Kenya Republic would by default adopt henceforth, leadership and recognition is availed to personalities who are otherwise positioned by factors and circumstances not necessarily their efforts in people and community service. Mr. Pio Gama Pinto has the misfortune of not only being the first high profile political assassin, but also marks that’s transition in the now national psyche of cover up of political murders and assassinations. His assassination has since then been followed with the assassinations or mysterious deaths of Mr. Tom Mboya, Mr. Kungu Karumba, Mr. Bruce Mackenzie, Mr. J.M.Kariuki, Mr. Kiliti Mwendwa, Dr. Robert Ouko, Bishop Alexander Muge, Mr. Masinde Muliro, Mr. George Kapten and now Prof. George Saitoti. Struggles for transition to democracy are ably personified by Jaramogi Adonijah Abednego Ajuma Oginga Odinga, after a life dedicated to expanding democratic political space in the Republic of Kenya. The nemesis of this struggle, armed struggle for more political space after independence is securely represented by Snr. Private Hezekiah Rabala Ochuka. Madam Charity Kaloki Ngilu cuts a forlorn figure of women engagement in political development in the country. Her record and presence on the political map is yet to be challenged by any woman despite the same record being a poor show against the menfolk. It is very telling that both Messrs Daniel Toroitich arap Kimoi and Emilio Mwai Kibaki, former and current Presidents, are more of diligent conveyors of the status quo machinations than pivotal personalities of transition. b. The development of institutions for democratic governance: i).The struggle by natives to regain their sovereign power and dignity from the British Colonialists gained momentum of consolidation through nation-state outfits as was formed by the Coastals, Kikuyus, Kambas , Luos, Luhyas etc. These ethnic based institutions were soon almost simultaneously replaced by regional political parties and sector based trade unions that were more articulate at bargaining with the colonialist at the colonialists’ terms of; what interest do you represent, what acceptable structures do you have and what quick gains can you accept to remain relevant? In this forte struggle, the political parties represented by KANU and KADU trounced the trade unions in the lead upto independence. This was done by either absorbing the prominent trade unionist to significant political party positions or just making the trade unions agenda political party agenda and crowding the trade unions out of public visibility. Upon independence, the trade unions remained under, and the provincial administration was crafted as a government machinery that obliterated the political parties and confined them to irrelevance throughout the first two decades of independence. Upon re-introduction of multiparty politics in the early 1990s, mechanisms for multiparty democracy were democracy were not introduced too. This resulted in political parties now becoming vehicles to mobilisise tribal support and individualized political idolatry. This status has legally greatly been changed by the new order that now expects nationalism, people participation and democracy at party level first, before engaging at the national political leadership arena. The political parties will, after the next general election then have a chance to define their relevance as institutions of democracy over the life of the next parliament henceforth, as they already have a strong legal foundation. ii). Starting the 1980’s Parliament and Judiciary were conscripted as prominent democracy players specifically to constrict the democratic space through legislation, application of law and interpretation of law. With a concerted attack on all the governance institutions in place so far, namely; KANU- read political parties, Parliament and provincial administration and a jeering at the Judiciary, institutions of governance systematically crumbled and the governance of individuals and personalities was promoted as the new governance kid on the block. The new constitution, The Constitution of Kenya (2010) has leased new life into institutions of democracy in the county. With the appointment of a brand new Chief Justice, a totally new judicial system and a confidence instilling vetting of all its officers, the Judiciary is the most enthusiastic institution of governance in the country undergoing recreation. The Provincial Administration is frantically fighting for its survival by the proxy of a retiring Executive, while Parliament will face its most stern test when it is reconstituted after the next general election- the first one in the new constitutional order. c. The journey in structures for democracy 1.Security of the people has with the new constitutional order become the main focus and purpose of police. As before independence, the main purpose for police existence was until upto the end of the first republic, to protect the government machinery and cajole the citizenry into submission. The police recruitment, training, standing orders and deployment was first and foremost crafted to make the police feel informidable and the citizenry most subdued. The police thus have signified official terror, intimidation and oppression. This image is set to change when and if the envisioned constitutional police reforms come to be. These may not be manifested by the first general election after the promulgation of the constitution. 2.Another important structure in the democratic governance journey is the electoral machinery commonly known in Kenya as The Electoral Commission. Until upto the re-introduction of multi-party politics in the early 1990’s, it is the government functionaries that were charged with organising and conducting elections in the country. This arrangement did not give the process much independence leave alone credibility. It become worse in the 1970’s and 80’s when the whole process become a sole responsibility of the much discredited provincial administration and even further constrained if not blurred by being a one-party activity! The Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK) came into being in the early 1990’s as a distinct structure to manage and conduct electoral matters in the country, but its creation was shrouded with an intimidating presence of KANU, the ruling party. The leadership was suspect, its financing not independently secured from the government and its structures dilapidated in terms of personnel, equipment and credibility. They are most remembered for mismanaging all the elections under their watch almost without exception and the 2007/8 debacle hangs on their identity like the hallmark at the incompetence of discharging their mandate. The Government of Grand Coalition process provided for a transition mechanism where temporarily the mandate of managing elections and electoral areas was separated and given to interim institutions to facilitate a rebirth of the Electoral Commission under the then envisioned new constitution. During this interim process, wananchi demonstrated unprecedented belief and confidence in the electioneering process if the manner in which the bye-elections and the referendum were conducted and received. But the same enthusiasm was not extended to the electoral areas management unit which was tasked with redrawing the electoral boundaries and creation of new constituencies. This challenge has now been inherited by the substantive Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) that has regained the management mandate of both the electoral process and electoral areas. In coming up with IEBC, mechanisms were put in place to secure the process from the ECK pitfalls. These included insulating the process from pure political party manipulation in its constitution, securing the widest possible participation of all political players, subjecting the recruitment process to public and parliamentary scrutiny and securing its financial independence from the executive arm of the government. The effect of this massive process investment is in the public domain to be judged, at least just yet. 3. The civil society. Until upto the late 1970s, the civil society was largely absent on the Kenyan public governance scene. But nascent intellectual and legal debates in the university corridors enriched with continued unvoiced dissatisfaction created need to have alternative avenues to observe and generate alternative views to public governance matters in the counties. In the early 1980’s, the government employed a heavy hand to crush the now increasingly bold non-state actors commenting and attempting to influence public thought. They were viewed as carrion flies that were meddling min matters that first they did not have mandate to engage in and also that they supposedly know nothing about. This high handedness of the government made the civil society intervention in governance matters to go underground and out of the country but most important assume a political angle that resonated with the citizenry either as political nuisance or true political liberation struggle. By mid 1990s, the civil society had now had now come out more openly using legal spaces to stake legitimacy on engagement in public governance matters but were largely organized thematically but still mainly mobilized along individual and friendship relationships – maybe as a recoil effect of the protracted government crackdown on them. Mid 1990s witnessed unprecedented public participation in civil society governance engagement. The participation was so huge that not even political parties or government efforts could rival them. But the election of a non-KANU party and President to power in 2002 shook the civil society in a manner both not anticipated and ever witnessed before. Maybe it was an unexpected victory too soon. The transitions that occurred within this sector saw some hitherto biggest civil society organizations crumble, civil society prominent personalities join the government or politics in various capacities and various exclusive civil society mandates now taken over by the government. Needless to say that a lot of donor support disappeared with the hugely changed scenario. The effect of this was that, the until then taken for granted public watchdog role, registered a gap. The civil societies’ capacity for the first time become questionable in the eyes of the public, and the confidence of the civil society players and their authoritativeness in engaging the status quo plummeted to record lows. This became most evident in how in they participated in the 2007 General Elections in which they largely held no opinion! Concluding Opinion. The most challenge of securing sustainable democratic governance transition rests with the political parties and the civil society. The political parties must have to make participation in political matters attractive, fashionable, orderly, relevant and acceptable in decency. Those that will not, will either find themselves on the wrong side of the low or inconsequential on the political scene. While the civil society must engineer itself to be a source of alternative approaches to governance matters. The mandate that they have hugely played in the last decade or so, has with the new constitutional order irreversibly been dismantled. They have largely been playing lobby and advocacy position for or against government postulations! This role will now henceforth be more articulately and effectively played by political parties both at the national and county levels of government. =============================================================================