Uhuru Kenyatta should govern by consensus, not rule like Emperor Kenyatta II

President Uhuru Kenyatta (right) and Deputy President William Ruto during the presentation of funds to resettle internally displace people, 242 families who have been talking refuge at NAKA camp in Yamumbi in Eldoret. FILE PHOTO | JARED NYATAYA | NATION MEDIA GROUP 
 

In Summary

• When the shilling loses value because investors and tourists stay away with their dollars, everyone will pay more at the estate kiosk, whether they are Cord or Jubilee supporters.
• A meeting to seek consensus on what laws were needed, followed by an inter-parliamentary group kamukunji and later a forum to seek the views of people outside elective politics, would have helped the country come up with a position that helps keep Kenya safe without turning it into a dictatorship.
• The constitution’s experiments with ceding these powers to a national police commission and taking away the authority of the police chief even to transfer officers should be applied in peaceful Scandinavia, not in a country facing the problems Kenya does.

By MURITHI MUTIGA

Thabo Mbeki made a memorable observation of the first impressions he formed of his rivals when, in the early 1990s, Nelson Mandela gave the anti-Apartheid forces permission to negotiate with the old enemy.

Mbeki records that when both representatives of the white minority government and of the African National Congress sat around a table, they quickly realised that neither side’s representatives had tails behind their posteriors or horns protruding from their foreheads.

They were just normal people, separated by an ocean of hostility and fear. When they began the talks, they made quick progress, despite several major obstacles, and surprised the world by coming up with a deal which ended Apartheid. It is easy to forget now that almost every analyst at the time expected a bloody, violent confrontation between the black majority and white minority amid the deep bitterness and divisions of the 1980s.

LESSONS

Uhuru Kenyatta has lessons to learn about how to govern while carrying the population with him.

Insecurity is a shared challenge. When a terrorist explosion goes off, it will not discriminate between a Maasai, Borana or Mijikenda.

When the shilling loses value because investors and tourists stay away with their dollars, everyone will pay more at the estate kiosk, whether they are Cord or Jubilee supporters.

It, therefore, makes sense to seek solutions through a spirit of consensus. No major changes in a democracy can enjoy broad acceptance if they are rammed down the throats of everyone by one side. When it became clear that his government needed stouter laws to tackle the Shabaab menace, the first thing Kenyatta should have done was to pick up the phone and call Cord leader Raila Odinga.

Both men know each other well. They have cooperated many times, most memorably in the 2005 constitutional referendum campaign, when they united against Narc’s attempts to force a constitution supported by a minority of Kenyans into being the supreme law of the land.

TURNING INTO DICTATORSHIP

Raila is aware Kenyatta does not have a tail and Kenyatta knows that his opponent does not have horns jutting out of his head.

A meeting to seek consensus on what laws were needed, followed by an inter-parliamentary group kamukunji and later a forum to seek the views of people outside elective politics, would have helped the country come up with a position that helps keep Kenya safe without turning it into a dictatorship.

Instead, President Kenyatta decided to behave like an emperor. “I have the numbers in Parliament, if you don’t like it, jump into the sea.” In the process, he has tarnished the legitimacy of even those amendments to the law which are a common sense step back from the ultra-liberal positions crafted into the constitution. I believe, for example, that people credibly suspected of planning terror attacks should not be granted bail.

If the President will be judged, above all, on whether he can guarantee the security of Kenyans, then it makes sense to allow him to have the power to hire or fire the police commissioner, perhaps the most important single figure in ensuring citizens can enjoy their sleep at night.

The constitution’s experiments with ceding these powers to a national police commission and taking away the authority of the police chief even to transfer officers should be applied in peaceful Scandinavia, not in a country facing the problems Kenya does.

WILD RAMPAGE

Yet instead of framing some narrow changes, in partnership with the opposition and in consultation with citizens, Kenyatta’s narrow inner circle went on a wild rampage through the constitution, stripping away basic rights, coming up with draconian prescriptions and seeing enemies everywhere, especially in newsrooms.

Worse, they decided that they would take us back to the days of Shariff Nassir’s mpende msipende. (Whether you like it or not).

This is not only a poor strategy of governance, it is an approach that will not make Kenyans safer.

If there is anything that should have drawn cross-party consensus, then it would have been the need to secure Kenyans from bloodthirsty bandits and killers. Instead, Kenyatta has chosen to divide the nation, which is a shame.

mutiganews@gmail.com