On Kenya’s Oligarchy, Twisted Democracy & Dashed Hopes of the Third Liberation

Kenyans queuing to vote in the 2017 elections
Photo Courtesy: CNN 

A year after Kenyans took to the polls, a number of political events have occurred, and have shaped the country’s political landscape in some respects.

From nullification of the outcome of the presidential election, the repeat presidential election boycotted by Raila Odinga, the historical swearing-in of Odinga as the people’s president, the muzzling of dissenting voices by the administration of the day to the unexpected handshake, it’s been a political melodrama of sorts.

Reflecting on the pre-election and post-election happenings, Kenya comes out as a flourishing oligarchy and a failing democracy, a twisted one for that matter.

Fundamentally, a democracy is a political system characterized by a free, fair and credible electoral process. On the other hand, the electoral process in an oligarchy comes out as fraudulent, fake and crooked.

Basing on the credibility of the electoral process in the lead up to the 2018 general elections, it is correct to assert that Kenya’s trajectory towards a vibrant democracy is twisted.

Historically, Kenya’s political system, and extensively the economic system, only benefit few individuals who control the means of production and the balance of power. This is an explicit manifestation of an oligarchy.

Kenya’s pre-supposed democratic tendencies, to say the least, are far-fetched and illusionary. Politically and economically, the majority, whom democracy accords the right to call the shots, have never had their way in the country with the exception of the formation of the NARC administration and the institutionalization of the current constitutional dispensation.

An honest rumination in view of Kenya’s political and electoral malfeasance wouldn’t take place without weighty consideration of the compromised Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), the role and influence of the Western states – the so-called masters and defenders of democratic ideals, the excessively irrational average voter, the highly deceptive public relations (PR) and political consultancy firms, and the Third Liberation whose conceptualization is fast waning.

Basically, an institution is as good or bad as the people charged with the mandate to steer it. From the family – the basic unit of social organization, a school, an organization, a football team and a government, competence is a tenet necessary for the success or failure of an entity.

In the run up to the 2018 general elections IEBC’s senior officers proved to be partisan and compromised thus jeopardizing the independence of the electoral body.

Independence of an electoral body is the foremost step in having a free, fair and credible electoral process. The independence of the IEBC is interfered with right from the appointments of the commissioners and other senior officers of the country’s electoral body.

The embattled chair of IEBC Wafula Chebukati has proven to be quite incompetent but this is not a surprise anyway given his subpar performance while being vetted by Parliament for the hot seat. He was not the best out of the other candidates and being appointed to chair the IEBC fixed him in a corner.

Other commissioners were clearly partisan and their political intentions well known. We can’t have a clean electoral process with such poisoned minds running an exercise that determines the fate of Kenyans economically, socially and politically.

Western states – the masters of impunity and double-standards – supported a corrupt regime out of geo-political and geo-economic interests. Led by the American government, they pronounced the legitimacy of an administration which they were not in favour of in 2013.

Who offers support and confers legitimacy to a regime whose rogue police officers killed and injured innocent Kenyans including harmless children?

Setting the record straight, political correctness is the language preferred by the governments of the Western states. Kenya’s case and other immoral governments across Africa being cheered on by the West is largely informed by their (Western states) intentions to counter China’s influence on the continent.

If the likes of the American, British, French and other Western governments are champions and crusaders of democracy, then it would make sense if they were not funding undemocratic regimes and toppling legitimate governments around the world.

As matter-of-factly, Western governments have never condemned the rogue and undemocratic regime in Saudi Arabia. They wreaked havoc in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Syria and other nations but only as a divide and rule scheme driven by paranoia and economic interests.

Apart from the political relief offered by the West, the deception and destruction caused by the global political consultancy firms such as Cambridge Analytica should never be forgotten going forward.

The political consultancy firms are in pursuit of profits, economic capital and economic power as the political parties and formations are hell-bent in pursuit of political capital and political power. But to what extent is the price to be paid for the trade-off between business profits and political power?

Apparently, the price is costly and takes the form of a disintegrated country. These firms pursue their profits by optimizing on the structural weaknesses of a country.

For instance, in Kenya, Cambridge Analytica which was responsible for running the Jubilee Party’s political campaign ostensibly capitalized on the ethnic fault lines that are highly visible in the Kenyan society.

So far no serious step has been made in banning such firms from operating in Kenya especially in running political campaigns. This country is a joke. Pressure from various entities eventually forced Cambridge Analytica to shut down its operations.

In South Africa, PR firm Bell Pottinger, known to work for despots, was chased from the country after running racially charged campaigns especially on economic reform and the prevalent socio-economic inequalities in the country.

But unlike in Kenya where the public never protested about Cambridge Analytica’s divisive campaign, the publics in Britain and South Africa were vocal on the firms’ PR gimmicks.

Involvement of these firms in Kenya’s political space with the intention of driving narratives that are misleading and dangerous casts the country as a twisted democracy.

Embers of the Third Liberation that flamed up following the flawed electoral process flickered out as soon as the ‘handshake’ between Raila Odinga and Uhuru Kenyatta came to the fore.

Doubts have been cast on the supposed Building Bridges Initiative and yours truly is among the doubters. Judging from Kenya’s political history the ‘handshake’ is as good as any other political deal and its abandonment would not be a surprise.

Political (electoral) justice and economic justice should be the key drivers of the Third Liberation. But with political interests taking centre stage the hopes for a new Kenya are dashed.

Failure to address injustices committed in recent times and long before that will not actualize building bridges on the social, political and economic issues that divide Kenyans. Ignoring the implementation of the recommendations put forth by the Truth Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC) only sets the country on a path for intensified calls for secession, massive socioeconomic inequality and electoral skullduggery in the near future.

In view of the aforementioned weighty issues, where does the Kenyan public stand? There is no hope for a better Kenya considering the dubious electoral and political decisions made by majority of members of the public.

Can the Kenyan public dislodge the oligarchs that have patronized the country’s politics and economy since the dawn of independence? This is a question of fundamental importance. But with a significant number of Kenyans voting in an unintelligent fashion and being unapologetic about their ethnic political ideologies there is no hope of Kenya transitioning to a nation.

Kenya has never been a nation. All the episodic moments of nationhood – independence, the Second Liberation, dethronement of the rogue and despotic KANU regime and promulgation of the current Constitution – involved elements of disenchantment with individuals at the centre of the government preferring to subscribe to the ideals of an oligarchy.

Let’s not pretend to pursue national unity in the spirit of the ‘handshake’ and the doctrine of accepting and moving on while escaping from addressing the country’s problems. That is not how a nation is built.

Let’s Address Electoral Injustice & Stop the Pretence

Embattled Chairman of IEBC.
Photo: Courtesy. 

Several weeks after the ‘handshake’ between Raila Odinga and Uhuru Kenyatta, political temperatures seem to have cooled down. The opinion shared by a significant majority of the Kenyan citizenry is the need to focus on development and not the political ballyhoo that was the norm during the electioneering period.

It is common for Kenyan politicians occupying various political offices to insist on the need to forget about what they term in their own words as unnecessary politicking.

Well, they might have invoked the thought of using commonsense whose rarity in Kenya’s political sphere is legendary.

One of the striking features of Kenya’s politics is the unnecessary politicking that has attained remarkable standards and grand notoriety. But sentiments laden with phrases such as unnecessary politicking often serve as statements of convenience to put off the politically incorrect folks calling for reforms or individuals keen to wrestle power from the incumbents.

Proponents of the notion that selectively encourages sections of the electorate to ignorantly embrace the development mantra and pretentiously forget about politics are, to say the least, an uninformed bunch of irresponsible politicians.

I cannot fail to express my displeasure and disappointment in regards to the false narration on the notion of promoting development regarded as the ultimate trade-off for the so-called unnecessary politicking. This is political brainwashing at its best.

Unbeknownst to many, development is a multidimensional concept and its narrow interpretation is a question of subjectivity.

The cunning and conniving Kenyan politicians religiously spin the misinformation that development is all about economic growth. They wouldn’t prioritize social and political development that are elemental in the structural transformation of a country.

And even as they pretentiously champion for economic growth and development, they tend to forget that economic reforms meant to address income inequalities, unemployment and the high cost of living are fundamentally important.

Unfortunately, the kind of development that is the politician’s best bet and metric for performance is that based on physical infrastructural projects such as roads and buildings most of which tend to be under-utilized and constructed based on voting patterns in a given constituency, nationally or locally.

Kenya’s political class has never been committed in promoting the country’s political development. The culture of impunity is deeply entrenched in the country’s political system, and worst of all, the electoral process is compromised with the electoral body’s independence jeopardized by the antics of the invisible political hand.

Vision 2030, whose attainment will be the greatest miracle of the 21^st century, categorically outlines that Kenya’s development is to be propelled by three pillars namely the social pillar, economic pillar and political pillar.

The political pillar is to facilitate the entrenchment of democracy. A notable milestone under this pillar was the drafting and ratifying of a new constitution that replaced the old, tattered colonial legal relic that had been punctured for 47 years between 1963 and 2010.

But close to eight years after abandoning the fossilized colonial constitutional dispensation, whose observance was a matter of political correctness and convenience, nothing much has changed. The full implementation of the current constitution seems to be an option and not a duty for the government of the day.

For instance, the electoral process is still subject to manipulation with the independence of the electoral body only existing in name. With the benefit of hindsight, the conduct of the Independent Electoral & Boundaries Commission (IEBC) in the 2013 and 2017 general elections leaves a lot to be desired.

The two general elections reveal the total lack of seriousness to get over the electoral hangovers of Zacchaeus Chesoni and Samuel Kivuitu during the era of the defunct Electoral Commission of Kenya (ECK).

After Kivuitu’s first class arrogance and unrivaled dalliance with the netherworld, following his cat-and-mouse games of releasing fabricated presidential results in 2007, majority of Kenyans believed that with the recommendations of the Kriegler Commission, electoral injustice would be addressed once and for all.

We were wrong. The power hungry political gods would hatch a conspiracy with the ghosts of Chesoni and Kivuitu to wreck IEBC’s intentions to deliver a credible election. The first IEBC team has an egg-faced history of siphoning taxpayers’ money through the procurement of fake kits meant for biometric voter registration at a cost of over Kshs. 9 billion.

The discredited and disgraced IEBC team under the wobbly leadership of Wanyonyi Chebukati is not in any way better than Issack Hassan’s team. Chebukati’s team is a true manifestation of world class incompetence.

Chebukati was set to fail from the onset. His dismal performance during the interviews to fill up vacant positions at the commission was a signal of the flippant leadership he brought to the electoral body. His wonky leadership created opportunities for manipulation of the electoral system set up by IEBC, and allowed commissioners to be compromised resulting in the annulment of the August 8^th presidential election results.

Your’s truly holds a record, never mind whether it is a dubious or distinguished one, in deprecating Chebukati’s leadership from when he was interviewed for the country’s most difficult job. One of his colleagues, Roselyn Akombe, resigned last year, and recently the electoral body has witnessed the exodus of three other commissioners.

Apart from the intrigues facing the dishonoured electoral body, the country is now awash with the debate on the much hyped ‘Big Four’ policy agenda and the ‘handshake’. The ‘Big Four’ agenda degrades the relevance of political justice and democracy in development, and promotes the notion that economic development is more important.

Any sane economist would make a submission that democracy is elemental in the development process. However, authoritarian political regimes have also shown that economic growth and development can also be attained without the entrenchment of democracy.

But then democratic countries prosper economically when compared to authoritarian states whose economies falter when they disregard the need for political reforms. This is the path that the current administration has embraced; economics matters more than politics. This is a warped perception.

Conventional folks are banking on the unity office created as a result of the ‘handshake’ to address fundamental issues such as electoral injustice. Methinks that this won’t happen as the ‘handshake’ was an event born out of political interests.

If the Uhuru Kenyatta led administration was genuinely indebted to Kenya’s prosperity then at least political justice and electoral reforms should have featured in the much publicized ‘Big Four’ agenda.

To guarantee the country prosperity it is imperative that political justice, and in particular far-reaching electoral reforms, should be prioritized. Self-inflicted ignorance and arrogance livened through the “it is time for development” phrase is a denial of the challenges facing the Republic.