A Political Kenya: Latest Politics and Kenya Economy News

Friday’s announcement by Mr Gideon Moi that he will soon embark on a countrywide tour to revive Kanu has rekindled debate about the role and future of party politics in the country.

Kanu fortunes have been on a steep decline since the re-introduction of pluralism in the country, with representation in Parliament plummeting to 14 from 107 in 1997 when it was on the roll.

The current Parliament is made up of 22 political parties, four fifths of which have less than three members in the House. When Moi embarked on a mission to revamp the independence party, it had support in the Rift Valley, Central Kenya and North Eastern provinces.

However, the party can take solace in the fact that it is not the only one going through a rough patch.

The Democratic Party (DP), which was once associated with President Kibaki, Mr Musikari Kombo’s Ford-Kenya, Ford-Asili, Kenya Social Congress (KSC), the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), Safina, Labour Party of Kenya and Ford People are all in trouble.

Statistics since 1992 when Kenya embraced political pluralism show that while the number of parties has been on the rise, those that had a national outlook have been disintegrating.

Kanu, DP and Ford-Kenya are among the leading casualties.

Former Member of Parliament for Liakipia West, Mr GG Kariuki, blames the Constitution for the electorate’s apathy to party politics.

"Had we succeeded in coming up with a new constitution that addresses the concerns and fears of every Kenyan, political parties would not be in a limbo. Kenya’s independence Constitution is a patchwork of laws that protect the interests of the rich and leave the poor and vulnerable at the mercy of nature," Kariuki, who served in both the Moi and Kibaki administrations, said on Friday.

He says the Constitution does not address the question of national cohesion and as a result the country is on the verge of self-destruction as parties jostle for power and clout.

"No party qualifies to be called a national party. The Party of National Unity (PNU) and the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM), for example, are conglomerations of smaller parties that represent ethnic and regional interests," said Kariuki, who in 1992 was elected to Parliament on a DP ticket.

DP, whose stronghold was Central Province in 2002, was one of the 14 "small" parties that teamed up to form the National Rainbow Coalition alliance that ousted Kanu.

"The Constitution is a package of British colonialism," he said, "which has ensured that the status quo does not change in politics."

He said the disintegration of parties that had national appeal follows a pattern created inadvertently by the Constitution.

The veteran politician is, however, against calls to reduce the number of parties to just two or three to enable ideas instead of tribe take centre-stage.

"Let them come up, compete and die. The law of natural attrition should be allowed to determine the fate of the parties so that everyone feels he has chance to participate in national issues," he said. He said restricting the number of parties by law or constitution has the potential to create a tyrannical Government.

Even before the defeat, Kanu’s fortunes had been dwindling because of what a senior party member described as reluctance to accept reforms from within.

For Prof Ruth Oniang’o, Kanu was bereft of ideas and its imminent death is not a surprise.

"The party has fewer members in Parliament because it refused to apologise for its misdeeds since independence. It balkanised the country into ethnic fiefdoms and when it was handed a resounding defeat in 2002, it should have realised that the electorate was angry with it. The party is on the verge of death," said Oniang’o, a former Kanu nominated MP and shadow Education minister in the Ninth Parliament.

She predicted that the grand old party is destined to become a fringe outfit, or even die completely unless it reorganises itself.

"The problem we have is poor political leadership. I don’t see any serious leader among the crop of leaders we have. When too many parties are sprouting and others dying, it is a reflection of the quality of leadership we have in the country," said Oniang’o.

She said: "Party trotting reflects a dearth of leadership, which is mitigated by politicians rooting for narrow ethnic interests."

A casual look at the representation in Parliament shows a growing slump over the years among parties that ruled between 1992 and last year.

In 1997, Kanu had 107 elected members and six nominated lawmakers. This number dropped to 64 elected and four nominated in 2002. Last year, the party failed to field a presidential candidate, but saw its numbers tumble further to 14.

Over the same period, Ford Kenya, which once had support in all eight provinces, waned. In the 1997 General Election, Ford-Kenya was the second most popular party garnering 17 seats. In the last General Election, Ford-Kenya managed only one seat.

DP had 39 elected and two nominated members in Parliament in 1997 but lost its lustre when its chairman, President Kibaki, gave it a wide berth in the last election. It has two members in Parliament.

Narc, which was founded on the eve of the 2002 elections and formed the Government with 125 elected and seven nominated MPs, now has only three elected members.

Asked for comment, former Subukia MP Mr Koigi Wamwere said the parties are not dying but are resizing to fit in their ethnic contexts.

"The smaller parties that had an ethnic appeal have remained virtually the same while those with a national or class outlook have been affected by the changing political landscape. Kanu, DP, Ford-Kenya and Narc were national parties. We are seeing a trend and ethnic identity that these parties are trying to acquire," said Wamwere.

He argued that the slow death of parties is a reminder that the country is headed for self-destruction, "just as the parties are dying or failed to grow out of their ethnic base."

"We must decide now to put aside the national and wear the tribe garb because leaders are averse to the national good. The parties are just reacting to its leadership, which unfortunately inclines towards negative ethnicity," he said.

He posed: "Do we kill the class or national appeal in favour of ethnic organisations? We have seen churches, mosques, the media, and politics acquire a tribal dimension. We must choose to exist together or exist apart."

Communication consultant, Mr James Ohayo, summed shrinking party fortunes as an inevitable end. This is because they promote individual and ethnic agenda at the expense of higher common good.

While the politicians are thriving, he observed, their political parties are declining often because of pathetic delivery on policies and national agenda.

"Were they commercial ventures most of the political parties would be bankrupt today," Ohaya wrote in the countdown to last year’s polls.

He was referring how ethnicity has replaced issue-based politics."

ANY RESIDUE OF THE GRAND Coalition’s honeymoon is fading away fast. An element of goodwill and hope remain, but it is diminishing quickly as the mounting problems confronting it and the country multiply. They are compounding fast and in turn making the task of government more onerous.

It has not been helped by the fact that we now have a huge and unwieldy government. There may be validity in the argument that this was the price we had to pay for peace. But, there are many Kenyans who feel that there is an excessive, some would argue greedy, element of self-serving and reward to loyalists by the ruling political elite.

On the one hand, we are fast being engulfed by a period of rising expectations, demands and frustrations that are being fuelled by the ever-rising cost of living, and on the other, by belated and often confused action on how to tackle them.

THE UNPRECEDENTED WALK-OUT on President Kibaki on Labour Day when he said there would be no increase in the minimum wage because times were hard spoke volumes.

Here was the head of a bloated government of over 90 ministers and assistant ministers, who are all drawing fat cat salaries even by international standards, basically telling Kenyans times are tough, tighten your belts and eat less and accept a continuing decline in your standard of living.

This irony was further emphasised when the latest batch of inflation statistics showed that Kenya was now experiencing the highest inflation rate since those dark days of the Goldenberg era.

It cannot be emphasised enough that any delays, impediments or wrangling in our new top-heavy government to getting down to serious work is making the challenges more gargantuan by the day.

We have the immediate legacy of the past unrest and mayhem coupled with the damage and wounds inflicted. Persuading the internally displaced persons to go back to the homesteads from which they fled is proving a hard task, and shows clearly that suspicion, hatred and fear run deep and cannot be papered over.

Whether the root causes are historical, resource-based or fuelled by poverty and inequity makes no difference to the realities confronting us when it comes to any attempts at reconciliation and greater harmony.

The strike by prison warders and the threats of several other strikes in the public sector are arguably the start of a period of major labour and social unrest. It is logical that in the formal sector, it will start where pay and conditions are at their worst, and as we have witnessed, they can’t get much worse than the lot of a prison warders.

But the unrest is likely spread beyond the public sector into the formal and informal private sector. Whilst pay and conditions may not be as bad as in the public sector, the avalanche of increases in the price of most essential commodities is fast reducing the standards of living of the vast majority of Kenyans.

In addition, much of the private sector got severely disrupted by the post-election mayhem, and in many cases, it has yet to recover.

Its latitude to increase wages to ease the burden of rising prices is, therefore, severely limited, especially as the foreseeable economic and commercial outlook looks tight.

As we witnessed with the post-election violence, there is fertile ground for volatility and discontent in the half of the population who not only live below the poverty line, but are also being hammered by these rising prices.

THE PROSPECTS OF THIS DISCONTENT with the rising cost of food and living generally spilling over into civil defiance or riots are, therefore, high.

This is especially so if the Government delays on taking remedial action to ensure there is adequate food in the coming months.

Assurances by the Government that there are adequate stocks of maize, that these reserve stocks will be increased, and that two million bags will be shortly imported may show that the Government is waking up to the gravity of the problem.

But if the stocks on the farms and in the stores are not anything like the Government assumes, if NCPB’s reserve stock is fast running down, if only half of the Northern Rift grain basket is planted, then the measures announced by the Government so far will not go far in addressing Kenya’s looming food crunch.

BEFORE WE IMPUTE IMPROPER motives on the part of those MPs who wish to institute a structured mechanism through which backbenchers can formally engage the Government to keep it on the straight and narrow, it is advisable that we don’t proceed on the basis of distortions.

Individuals and parties run for elections in the hope that they will form the next government. It is only after they fail to make the numbers required that they embrace the opposition as a fallback measure. I am yet to hear of any serious party that offers itself for election so that it can be out of government.

I, therefore, find it extremely dishonest to argue that these MPs should not be allowed to form a formal opposition simply because they are doing so after being left out of the Grand Coalition Government.

On the contrary, it is precisely because they were left out that they qualify to form a formal opposition.

The principle of collective responsibility does not allow ministers to oppose Government policies in Parliament. In fact, if the Grand Coalition Government is to deliver its promise, its entire membership must be strictly bound by the principle of collective responsibility.

Further, a structured opposition is one of the mechanism by which we can ensure that the coalition partners stay in place until they midwife the new dispensation they are supposed to.
Some people have argued that we take a journey back in time to the days when solo efforts by some MPs provided a modicum of opposition in Parliament.

To these people, our MPs can still play the opposition role as individuals like Mr Martin Shikuku, the Seven Bearded Sisters and others did in the 1960s, the 1970s and the 1980s under the Kanu dictatorship.

But such arguments do not augur well for the development of democracy. Our democracy will only be healthy the day we have healthy institutions.

A formal opposition cannot be done away with simply because we have the coalition Government or because some individuals have now ascended to power and would like to have an easy ride.

AND DEFINITELY, A SPACE OF THE formal opposition must not be kept conveniently vacant so that it can provide an exit for those who plan to decamp from the coalition in 2012.
The institution of the formal parliamentary opposition in democracies the world over is formally recognised in the laws of those countries.

But in Kenya, there is no specific law on any form of opposition in our Parliament. The Constitution is silent on the issue, only saying that Kenya will be a multiparty democracy. From the constitution to Parliament’s Standing Orders, there is scanty mention of opposition.

Our laws don’t clearly provide for an opposition other than when they mention it in passing like giving the leader of the opposition some role in the Parliamentary Service Commission.

There is also some implicit recognition of some form of opposition when the law requires that the President should consult party leaders when he appoints ministers from their parties.

What is refreshing about the current move by MPs to form a Grand Opposition is that for the first time, our Parliament will have a chance to legislate specific laws on the institution of the Official Opposition once the relevant Bill is tabled.

Parliament must legislate what happens when all major parties end up in a coalition government in future.

So those ministers and MPs opposed to the formation of a Grand Opposition for whatever reasons, including that it will threaten loyalty to political parties, should stop running around the country distorting the issue and wait to translate their concerns in Parliament when the proposed Bill comes up for debate.

We have in the last couple of days heard a group of Cabinet ministers campaigning for one of their own to succeed President Kibaki. And from the same side, we have heard others express disquiet about such a move.

From the other side of the governing coalition, we have heard ministers say their ultimate goal still remains to secure power and win tenancy at State House.

From both sides, we could do with more focus on work rather than extremely premature political campaigns.

Politicians, of course, have the right to aim for the highest office in the land and to put in place the machinery to help realise their dreams.

But there is a time and place for everything. We are being governed by a young coalition that is still trying to work in harmony.

The coalition was cobbled together principally to save Kenya from sliding into anarchy following a disputed presidential election.

The coalition government, and the entire body-politic, is still at a very delicate stage. Those serving in it are still learning to work together. The post-election violence still has to be dealt with.

At this stage of such a fragile situation, we would expect our ministers to focus on service delivery, and concentrate on seeking a permanent cure for a troubled nation.

The same old politics of perpetual competition must be put aside for the moment, even if only to buy the coalition government the breathing space it needs.

IT WAS JUST THE OTHER DAY that Cabinet ministers, assistant ministers and permanent secretaries gathered for what was described as a bonding session.

The meeting was supposed to lay down the law on how the Grand Coalition Government made up of representatives of rival parties would function smoothly.

President Kibaki and Prime Minister Odinga used the function to impress on them that they were now in one government, not a ‘two-in-one’ arrangement.

There was plenty of talk about working in unison, pulling in the same direction, not speaking out of turn, resolving issues internally rather than making noise on the public platform, and respecting the doctrine of collective responsibility.

The team-building and bonding session was, obviously, a total failure. Just scan through what has been coming out in public, and it becomes clear that many Cabinet ministers still owe their first loyalty to their respective political parties.

There are some from ODM who are talking as if they are still in the opposition, and there are some from PNU who are behaving as if they own the Government. I don’t know where else in the world Cabinet ministers would take to the rostrum to make demands on the same Government they serve.

Over the weekend, for instance, we heard renewed calls for the release of those arrested in the Rift Valley over their roles in plotting and executing the post-election carnage.

These calls were coming, not from some motley bunch of MPs and councillors, but from some of the most important figures in the coalition, including the Prime Minister himself, and Cabinet ministers William Ruto and Henry Kosgey.

Now, maybe those who perpetrated the organised bloodletting in the wake of the disputed presidential election ought to be let free in the interests of coalition harmony. Those at the rallies where the calls were referred to them as “our boys”, and Mr Odinga pointedly stated that those arrested fought for democracy.

Those are admissions as clear as can be that the killers and arsonists responsible for the worst ethnic bloodletting in independent Kenya were serving a political cause and did not just rise spontaneously in anger as has been claimed.

But that is beside the point for now. The issue is whether those responsible, whatever side of the divide they killed for, ought to have been freed as part of the negotiated political settlement.

Such demands at this stage are very strange for the simple reason that nowhere in the power-sharing agreement was there mention of blanket amnesty for murderers, rapists, looters and arsonists.

That is not to say the issue cannot be discussed. The initial violence may have been organised, funded and executed by one side aggrieved by the extremely suspicious outcome of the general election.

But there was also, excessive use of force by the police, as well as retaliatory attacks by irregular militias apparently dispatched to do what the security organs of government could not do.

ONE SIDE MAY HAVE BORNE THE brunt of the killings and suffered the most from displacement, but ultimately, there were atrocities on both sides.

Walking around free are many people who revelled in spilling blood and who would be quite happy to be of service again if called upon.

Those arrested can be only a fraction of those involved, and there might be cause for concern that the authorities were not even-handed when it came to pursuing the perpetrators. If there is to be final closure to the whole sorry episode, it will not be in wholesale amnesty or in leaders demanding that their respective murderers be let-off, but in a more viable and inclusive process under the truth and justice process.

In the meantime, however, Cabinet ministers should be pressing their concerns in the proper forums, within the Cabinet, rather than making public demands and inciting their people against the very government they serve.

All those serving in the Grand Coalition Cabinet surely have the very sacred burden of working towards healing the wounds and setting Kenya back on the path towards peace, unity, stability, democracy and prosperity.

This government was formed out of a unique and very critical situation, and it must show that it is operating in unity because that is what will set the good example for the rest of us who may have turned against neighbour.

Taking to the public matters that could best be resolved through quiet consultation is just another way of sending out the message that the Grand Coalition arrangement is just a charade that will soon crumble.
It is a way of priming those who have been used on murderous sprees to be at the ready in case they are called into action again.

Such manoeuvres we could do without. Yet we must acknowledge that there are some grave issues that will not be wished away.

Kenya seems to have gained a useful friend in billionaire entrepreneur and adventurer, Sir Richard Branson. He wants the country’s tourism industry resuscitated in a hurry, and has decided to do more than mouth platitudes — he is willing to invest to ensure more tourists flock here.

Violence unleashed by disputed election results last December affected every sector of the economy. The tourism industry was a major casualty of this haemorrhage that threatened to push the country into the intensive care unit.

Indeed, while the industry expected to earn at least Sh28 billion in the first four months of the year, only Sh8 billion was realised, meaning the number of visitors fell by nearly three-quarters due to the turmoil.

This is extremely bad news considering that tourism has been the country’s economic mainstay for years. But there is a way out: Kenya has to sell itself, first by restoring stability, and secondly by launching a sustained publicity blitz in Western capitals.

And to show the way, Sir Richard announced a Sh30 million advertising campaign in London, and in the UK national press.

This sum, though not mind-boggling, should go a long way towards selling the country as a preferred tourist destination.

It is fortunate that Sir Richard is not just your ordinary magnate with a soft heart for Kenya; he is a celebrity in every sense of the word, and when he spreads the word that Kenya is a great country to travel in, he is bound to be listened to by both the leisure class and investors.

However, we, as a country, cannot afford to rely on well-wishers to sell our country for us. It is laudable that the 11-year-old Kenya Tourist Board has woken up from slumber and organised a series of publicity campaigns in the West. Even if such campaigns have not paid off immediately, there is no reason why they shouldn’t in the long haul.

THE IMPORTANCE OF LAND and property rights for all can no longer be ignored, particularly in Africa.

This is highlighted by the land crises resulting in political and social turmoil in both Kenya and Zimbabwe.

Without access to secure land tenure for all, the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights cannot be achieved.

The preamble states that “…recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world.”

Yet too many people are simply locked out of the opportunities to own their own homes and to earn a livelihood off the land.

Land ownership represents much more than security and status. It is a source of livelihood, in particular for poor communities.

UN-Habitat executive director, Anna Tibaijuka emphasises the point: “Secure land and property rights for all are essential to reducing poverty, because they underpin economic development and social inclusion.”

Failure to ensure all have access to land with some kind of tenure keeps countries and communities locked into cycles of poverty and marginalisation, feeding discontent, fuelling discord, and highlighting divisions in society.

Current estimates show that five million people across the globe suffer the indignity of forced evictions every year.

This leads to the establishment of new informal settlements dependent on government, charity and donor support.

Often, the socio-economic and political impacts of these evictions reverberate for generations, and the costs are enormous.

Insecurity, unplanned developments, hazardous and unsanitary conditions that impact on the health of communities, are just some of the direct costs of forced evictions.

Each individual has the right to land tenure security, the right to enjoy ownership over land and the economic benefits that flow from it, and certainty that their rights will be recognised by others and protected.

While the argument that not everyone needs to own land today does hold water, it is important for those supporting this position to recognise that the importance of land tenure is more pronounced for poor communities.

Agriculture is recognised the world over as the strongest source of livelihood, and indeed, as the global food shortage continues to bite, the ability of smallscale farmers to produce their own food, as well as food for consumption by others, will be vital in the efforts to alleviate food shortages in developing nations.

In these countries, the provision of secure land rights for the poor is a critical component for driving food security, as well as economic development and prosperity.

FAILURE OF GOVERNMENTS TO recognise this and to emphasise equitable distribution of resources has been a huge contributor to socio-political upheaval in a number of states.

A study conducted by UN-Habitat in 2006, found that close to one billion people lived without any security of tenure in informal settlements in developing countries.

Out of a total global population of six billion people, developing countries alone have contributed to one-sixth of the world’s population without rights to housing and to property.

Developing nations must come to grips with urban poverty and rural development.

Investments must be pumped into rural infrastructure — roads, efficient and affordable energy and communications to enable effective production in rural areas.

Meanwhile, efforts must be redoubled to ensure unplanned and informal urban settlements are addressed.

Lack of planning, bad governance, lack of political will and corruption have resulted in massive slums.

One of the largest in the world is Kibera, with an estimated population of over one million.

Kenya’s Ministry of Housing, in partnership with UN-Habitat, has embarked on an upgrading project — the development of apartments, with financial instruments provided for residents of Kibera to access loans for purchase of their properties.

The project is in its early stages, but if successful, it could be used as a blueprint for future urban upgrading projects.

Building upwards means better utilisation of space and the provision of legal ownership documents ensures housing security for the urban poor.

A unique approach is that each unit has an extra room that can be leased to ensure there is income to cover monthly repayments.

A change of approach in land tenure and land management is vital for Africa. While it is the least urbanised continent, by 2030, it is estimated that Africa’s urban population will exceed the total population of Europe.

While most developed nations have land records that cover most of their territory, only a small number of developing countries have land records covering 30 per cent of their territory.

Corruption is a big factor. The lack of equity and integrity in land allocations and ownership has also been a driving force for conflicts on the continent.

Without a doubt, just and sound land policies are required for peace-building.

Ms Gichuru, an NTV presenter, filed this copy from the UN headquarters in New York.