RUTO`S BELATED REFERENCE TO SUPER MAJORITY IN AUGUST PLEBISCITE IS A PLOY.

In an interview that was aired by Radio Maisha and published in the Sunday Standard Newspaper of 18th July 2010, honorable William Ruto said that the results of the August plebiscite will raise serious questions if the proponents of the proposed constitution win with a margin of less than 65% of the eligible voters. In other words honorable Ruto is telling all and sundry that he will not hesitate to declare the referendum outcome null and void should it be below the international threshold. In his estimation at least 7 million Kenyans have to vote for the proposed constitution for it to enjoy legitimacy.

Interestingly, it is honorable William Ruto and the entire No Brigade that have dissuaded the country from ratifying international laws which in their opinion are dangerous to our democratic well being. Using the same reasoning I dare say that we must not use such an international law to midwife our constitution.

Acceding to such whimsical demands is tantamount to entrenching double standards. This is obviously Ruto`s ploy to ensure that the opponents of the proposed constitution defeat the fundamental tenet of democracy which explicitly states that the majority rules. In other words he is desperately attempting to ensure the absolute power of the minority. Such an inimical requirement also means that the minority can be declared the winners for merely abstaining from voting!
Subjecting Kenyans to such a requirement would mean that we will end up like the Ontarians who in 2005 held a referendum where 57% of eligible voters voted for change yet, because of a threshold law, the 43% minority ruled the day. To the majority of Ontarians this was indeed a very sad day.

The Montenegrins on seeing the fundamental flaws in the international threshold law became wiser. Their law on referendums states that the decision is to be taken by a majority of citizens eligible to vote. However, it does not fix any exact figure. To them, a simple majority is enough to make a referendum decision valid.

Back home, when Kenya held a referendum in 2005, there was no reference to the now much hyped international threshold. We generally agreed that the rule of the majority applies. But today, on sensing defeat, the opponents of the proposed constitution find it convenient to flaunt the threshold requirement as if voting is a mandatory exercise!

From the foregoing I find the recommendation of a 65% supermajority threshold for the upcoming referendum a blatant disrespect for the very process of constitutionalism that we ourselves have strived to set up for many decades. This requirement contains a virus which is dangerous to the stability of our country when it comes to the implementation of the results.

TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis