AFRICAN HEADS OF STATES MUST STOP UNDERMINING THE ICC.

I read with great consternation a press release from the African Union (AU) dated 29th August 2010 in which the ICC was censured for reporting Kenya and Chad to the UN Security Council and the Assembly of the State Parties to the Rome Statute over President Al Bashir`s fiasco. Therein was a re-affirmation of resolutions adopted by the AU summit about three months ago in Munyonyo Commonwealth Resort, Kampala. Here, the African heads of states for the umpteenth time unflinchingly reiterated that subjecting a “sovereign head of state” to a warrant of arrest is undermining African solidarity and African peace and security.”

Borrowing heavily from this communique, Mwangi Thuita, in his capacity as the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs opined in one of the local dailies that arresting Al Bashir (who is accused of murdering hundreds of thousands of Sudanese Christians among other war crimes) would be ignoring the region's raison d'être as well as undermining the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) midwifed by Kenya.

Sadly, the AUs communiqué as well as Thuita`s article point at African heads of states who are increasingly determined to shield themselves and their protégés from prosecution from crimes against humanity or genocide. In the pretext of local peace and reconciliation initiatives, they want to be given carte blanche to create a two-tier system of international justice. It will be suicidal to grant them such a wish given the fact that they have often demonstrated a genius for working at cross-purposes with the objects of the ICC. This will definitely lead to increased human rights violations by the same leaders with justice being the very least of their concerns.

Any keen observer would not fail noticing that beneath the African heads of states veneer of pursuing peace, justice, stability and reconciliation is an attempt at warding off any incursion at their comfort zones that are characterized by a common denominator: impunity.

It must be crystal clear to these leaders that no amount of immunity for a sitting president can justify the perpetration of heinous and murderous acts against his own citizens. The world will never let go unpunished such tragic bloodletting.

The public is therefore specifically warned to be wary of those who are desperately trying to accuse ICC of ignoring this region`s political realities. Such arguments are misleading as they are false.

With respect to the CPA, suffice it to say that nobody is against Kenya and its cohorts under the auspices of the AU and IGAD in spearheading its implementation. Indeed, the world lauds this initiative. But it would be extremely naïve to obsessively think that such an agenda can replace justice. The CPA was never intended to be Al Bashir`s washing powder. That is why (notwithstanding our inability to arrest him) his presence in Kenya was repulsive. Simply put, it was a huge diplomatic gaffe.

Kenya should therefore not flaunt unabated her sovereignty in defiance of the Rome Statute. She will undoubtedly become a target of unrelenting opprobrium and censure within international forums such as the United Nations. Unfortunately, this will not bode well with our struggling economy.

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

UHURU PARK CELEBRATIONS: WHAT A GREAT DISPLAY OF WORTHLESSNESS OF CANDOR!

“What a great display of worthlessness of candor?” a friend of mine remarked. Yet another one said, “It is a slap in the face of all those who thought for a minute that the new constitution was to be in itself a breath of fresh air.” I could not agree more with them. Amid all the pomp and fanfare that greeted the promulgation of the rafitified constitution was the conspicuous presence of Omar El Bashir at Uhuru Park. At the very least, his presence was an egregious violation of Kenya`s new constitutional chapter. His presence provided an anti-climax to this country`s constutional hour.

Suffice it to say that President Kibaki had all the powers to invite whomever he wished in to the country for that auspicious occasion, subject only to one caveat—that in so doing, he does not ride roughshod over the sovereign will of the people of Kenya. It must be remembered that Kenya has domesticated the Rome statute making it part and parcel of our constitution. By inviting, dining and wining with a person indicted by ICC for committing heinous acts of murder against hundreds of thousands of Sudanese people, President Kibaki violated not only the Rome Statute but he has also violated the sovereign will of the people of Kenya for which parliament and the conscientious public must hold him accountable.

Clearly, State House knew that this invitation would create a huge furore locally and internationally but still went ahead to make this egregious mistake and place the country under a flood of international condemnation with possible sanctions in the pipeline.

The fact that the planners at State House were undeterred is perhaps a clear indication that there is a coterie which for known reasons is irked with the Rome Statute. It (coterie), elected to use this invitation to send clear signals to ICC that Kenya will most certainly circumvent any attempts at retributive justice over the 2008 post election violence.

Apparently, this particular invitation was “a top state secret.” Not even the Foreign Affairs Ministry was privy to it. This explains the Ministry`s fuzzed responses when put to task to explain Bashir`s presence in the country. First, the Assistant Minister in the ministry mumbled something about Kenya arresting Bashir upon receiving a formal request from the ICC. Then the Foreign Affairs Minister, Moses Wetangula whimsically retorted that Kenya believes that nurturing peace and reconciliation in Sudan is a commendable ideal than arresting Bashir. What cheap hocus-pocus!

Any Tom, Dick and Harry can tell that such statements are just but cynical slogans, or euphemisms for impunity. Beneath this veneer of “reconciliation and peace building” is a calculated move aimed at protecting some politicians who may be in ICC`s books over their alleged involvement in the 2008 post election violence.

There is no doubt here that Kenya is hell bent on sending a strong statement to the world that its cooperation with ICC in terms of investigation, apprehending and prosecution of the suspected perpetrators of the post election violence, will not be guaranteed. There could be no other better way of sending that message than hosting and ensuring the safe passage of Bashir to and from Kenya under the full glare of the world. Call it impunity if you like.

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

THE CRISIS IN KENYA`S BASIC EDUCATION SECTOR.

The report by the African Population and Health Research Centre (APHRC) is a serious indictment on the mathematical competency of primary school teachers in the country. This study adds to a similar one jointly conducted by the Ministry of Basic Education and Kenyatta University which was released almost the same time last year. The latter decried the competency in the use of the English language among primary school teachers.

Cognizant of the fact that there has been a greater display of lackadaisicalness in the management of the basic education sector, the nation is faced with some difficult choices of conscience. We can either bury our heads in the sand as we are wont to or start acting in the best interest of our children. Unfortunately, the cost of inaction would turn out to be more than we can afford except by mortgaging our children`s future. It is for this reason that I wrote an opinion article titled “Revamp teacher training programmes” which appeared in the Standard Newspaper August 25 2009 on page 16) in which I stated that it was incumbent upon the government to fast-track the implementation of Sessional Paper No. I 0f 2005. This paper had a raft of proposals paramount for the enhancement of the capacities of teachers.


To begin with, it recommended the strengthening of regular in-servicing training for pre-primary and primary school teachers. But over and above this, it is my opinion that teachers at this level must, at the very least, complete a three year diploma course undertaken in a recognized institution to ensure that one has a thorough command of at least one teaching subject apart from a broad background of general education, as well as professional preparation that includes the psychology of children or adolescents, the principles and techniques of teaching, and the historical foundations of education.

Secondly, it highlighted the need for restructuring of high school teachers` training programmes by making them more intellectually rigorous. High school teachers were to subsequently undertake post-graduate training in pedagogy or extend the Bachelor of Education programme to five years.

For the above programmes to be successful, the government has to regulate teacher training institutions more stringently to curtail the possibility of training standards being diluted. Here, I am in full support of the recent directive by the Higher Education Minister which indicated that bogus middle level colleges are to be closed down.

Furthermore, and in line with the government`s objective to enhance monitoring and evaluation of the teaching work force, the Ministry of basic Education in conjunction with TSC must move with great speed to entrench performance contracting which ought to be applicable to all teachers irrespective of their scheme of service. TSC must also put in place career ladders for outstanding teachers apart from making it a lot easier for incompetent teachers to be axed. Teachers must be subjected to mandatory aptitude tests where they must show mastery of competencies and be at or above minimum competency levels in order to be rehired. The new teachers to be recruited must be subjected to thorough competency tests.

Most importantly, the government must seriously think of motivating the contracted teachers. This requires the establishment of competitive salaries as a matter of priority. The current pay is, for lack of a better term, debasing. This pay has seen highly qualified and experienced teachers exiting for lush professions. How can one expect teachers to love their profession when a Matatu tout with little or no basic education at all earns triple what a teacher earns? It need not surprise us that, under such circumstances teachers perform dismally. Perhaps the situation can only get worse.

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

MALE CIRCUMCISION IS NOT A SUBSTITUTE FOR RESPONSIBLE SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR.

Since the 1990s studies on whether male circumcision can be used as a preventive measure against HIV continue to be at great variance. Caldwell and Caldwell (1994) used geographical distribution evidence to argue that the association between lack of circumcision and a high level of HIV infection in Africa is credible.

Others like De Vincenzi and Mertens (1994) opine that the evidence for a relationship based on miniature surveys, is unconvincing and hence not conclusive enough to qualify male circumcision as an effective intervention. Siegfried et al (2005) point at an association between lack of circumcision and increased risk of HIV; but they conclude that the quality of evidence is insufficient to warrant implementation of male circumcision as a public health measure. In other words, they opine that there could be other factors besides lack of circumcision that could explain the higher rate of HIV infection in the males who are traditionally not circumcised.

In 2006, a press release from the American National Institutes of Health (NIS) cited Kenya and Uganda as study cases. The studies showed that about 56 circumcisions were needed to prevent one HIV infection. It must also be understood that in this particular context an association between circumcision and HIV infection did not prove a cause and effect relationship. There were definitely confounding variables. Moreover, the studies failed to avoid selection bias and expectation bias. From the foregoing, I am yet to come across a study that conclusively points at male circumcision as a preventive measure against HIV infection.

Given the existing information gaps, it would be naïve for anyone to appear to be billing male circumcision as public health policy. Such judgments are extremely dangerous. Unfortunately, the public continues to be inundated with popular reports from both the public health practitioners as well as from some sections of the media indicating that the likelihood of one contracting HIV after undergoing circumcision is minimal. They haughtily opine that it (male circumcision) reduces HIV infection by 60%. This may be so. But is a more than forty percent chance of infection (after a risky sexual behavior) minimal by any standards?

Such miscommunication is likely to have far reaching ramifications in the fight against the AIDS scourge in this country. Already reports are emerging that men who have recently undergone circumcision (in arrears where male circumcision is not a tradition) are eagerly waiting for the forty days in the wilderness to lapse (recuperation) before they rush into sexual frenzy. This is because they have inadvertently been made to believe that male circumcision is a substitute for other known prophylactic measures. Such misinformation will obviously contribute to the high rate of HIV infection in the regions where male circumcision is being billed as a preventive measure to HIV.

In my opinion behavioral factors are far more important in preventing new infections than the presence or absence of a foreskin. It is therefore incumbent upon the public health practitioners as well as the mainstream media to come up with an effective communication tool that will completely eradicate the myths surrounding male circumcision. Those being circumcised must be told in no uncertain terms that male circumcision is just but part of a comprehensive prevention package, which includes among other things; correct and consistent use of male or female condoms, faithfulness among married couples, reduction in the number of sexual partners, delaying the onset of sexual relations and HIV testing and counseling.

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

BASHING POLLSTERS WON`T CHANGE PUBLIC OPINION.

Poll opinions, especially in the form of pre-election polling are standard tools for politicians as well as numerous organizations and business firms concerned with mass public opinion. This is how we ought to understand them. Indeed, this is how poll opinions are understood the world over. But the same cannot be said of Kenya. Here, some politicians will almost always challenge the appropriateness as well as the validity of opinion polls, whenever such findings are not boding well with their political desires. They would accuse professional pollsters of having a tendency of the casual mind which, stumbling upon a sample which supports or defines their (pollsters`) prejudices; they would not hesitate to make it a representative of a whole population.

Yet if the same politicians were to be told that they were leading in the court of public opinion they would celebrate and hail it (poll) as a barometer of the 2012 general elections. At no time would they declare that the findings a diversionary tactic nor would they pour cold water on the pollsters.

Politicians must be advised that pollsters only tell the public which way the cat is jumping. It is upon politicians themselves to take care of the cat. Put in a different way, it is the work of politicians to sway public opinion in their own favor. They should therefore start by asking why polls seem unfavorable to them. This should then be followed by clear strategies that would see them try to reclaim the lost ground. Unless, of course, they are not equal to the challenge, and they have therefore resigned to letting public-opinion poll be a substitute for thought.

However, in the event that these politicians have qualms with the poll findings then the prudent thing for them to do is to engage other polling experts to carry out a similar exercise. It is doubtable whether shouting themselves hoarse in the public will help. In my opinion it will only portray them as people who do not espouse the fundamentals of scientific methodology which by and large, is anchored in logical reasoning and empirical objectivity.

I wish to remind them that unlike the Latinos, who can shout “De gustibus non est disputandum” meaning that opinions about matters of taste are not objectively right or wrong, and hence disagreements about matters of taste cannot be objectively resolved, scientific research, in the strictest sense of the phrase, goes beyond men of mere speculation. It has fundamental laws that must be followed to the letter.

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

WE MUST DENOUNCE THE UNSAVORY ARCHITECTS BEHIND FARCICAL ETHNIC ALLIANCES.

When Jean Jacques Rousseau opined that “freedom is a most succulent dish, but one that is difficult to digest”, his prophetic eye must have peered through Kenya. I say so because high above our national, tumultuous joy for the ratified constitution (after years of unparalleled hardships, incarcerations and callous deaths), I still hear loud and clear talks of ethnic-political barbecues whose taste is completely unpalatable. Even as the political big guns publicly denounce such schemes as a mere creation of the media, their foot soldiers have made it crystal clear that indeed such plans are afoot. It is even worrying that Kenyans, who yearned and fought for this constitutional dispensation, and who ought to be naturally incensed by such infantile designs, seem to be applauding the most, the unsavory architects behind such farcical schemes.

Such pacts presuppose the continuation of the negative ethnicity that this country has decried for so long. It promises to continue treating Kenyans as a collection of tribes in the bounds of a new Kenya. It purports to endorse the fact that the coalescing of populous ethnic groups is the highway to the much coveted presidency. It also means that the presidency in this country will almost certainly be determined by the odious ethnic driven merry- go- rounds.

Unfortunately, we seem not to recall the fact that such pacts are only executed wholly at the benefit of its conspirators. We readily allow them to invoke the hydra of negative ethnicity, and bang, we dance ourselves lame for them. We supplicate at the altar of these ethnic deities and humbly allow them to take advantage of our credulity and inexperience. The question that we ought to ask ourselves is just how long shall we continue to be used as mere pawns in their political chess game? Don`t we know that if we refuse to learn from the past and ignore vital lessons from our previous mistakes then we shall simply be heading in to the future covered with the deceptive warmth of our ignorance? For how long shall we gladly become blind tools of our own destruction?

The logical thing for us to do is to give a wide berth to any politician whose intention is to pitilessly tear asunder the motley ties that bind our pluralistic state. We must nail in the coffin of bigotry, the nauseous qualifications to the presidency based on ethnicity, gender and religion. Such qualifications bear no relationship whatsoever to the exercise of leadership skills.

It is incumbent upon Kenyans from all walks of life to earnestly embrace our diversity and never allow a cabal of ethnic zealots to use it (diversity) as a source of friction and division. With the ratification of the new constitution such politics must be frozen in an out-of-date mould. It is bad for our social and economic health.

I therefore implore all of us not be unencumbered by past ethnic perceptions and loyalties. We must remember that even with the new constitution in place, the evolution of a national identity will not just happen without the concerted efforts by both the political class and the citizenry.

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

THE PM IS NOT ANYBODY`S POLITICAL HOSTAGE.

I must confess that it is extremely difficult for me to comprehend the prodigious measure of infatuation some politicians have with the Prime Minister. Smarting under the humiliating referendum defeat a faction of the hitherto naysayers has now found a cooling effect in leveling their gratuitous gibes at the PM. For the umpteenth time, they have indicted him of cruelly flaunting his power, while treating those who delivered the premiership to him as peons.

With such sentiments, I now believe that theirs is a classic example of legislators who believe that by using their old and most favored method of blackmail, they can hold the PM as a political hostage in order for them to remain relevant in this very fast -shifting political landscape. Unbeknown to them, such intemperance is only helping to project the PM as the best among the pack. With promptitude born of political astuteness, he has called for reconciliation and national cohesion in the post referendum period while some legislators are still busy spoiling for a brawl.

To begin with, it is naive of these legislators to imagine that the PM can ride roughshod over ODMs Parliamentary Group (PG) resolutions. Raila`s opinions are not necessarily identical with those of the PG, even though he is its party leader. Like any other party member, the best the PM can do is to appeal to the PG to re-evaluate its decisions. It is therefore utter disrespect of the PM as well as the party's PG for some legislators to insinuate that the PG is nothing more than the PMs errand boys.

Secondly, directing such flak at the PM clearly lends credence to the fact that their sustained opposition to the proposed constitution was just but surreptitiousness for the continuation of their efforts at undermining him.

Thirdly, notwithstanding my opposition to their exclusion from cabinet and CIOC, I dare say that these legislators must rest their case on the breast of honesty. They must not take advantage of the prevailing calls for reconciliation and national cohesion to start demanding for immediate amendments to the just ratified constitution. Like the American statesman Benjamin Franklin, I dare say that “if every legislator, in returning to his constituents, was to report the objections he has to the ratified constitution, and endeavor to gain partisans in support of the so called “contentious clauses”, they will definitely and completely prevent its being generally received, and thereby lose all the salutary effects and great advantages resulting from this constitution.”

Besides, if they so hanker to be included in the CIOC (as they expressly indicated in their Arboretum Luncheon), it is incumbent upon them to desist from their career of treachery and genuinely support the country's overriding desire for the implementation of the ratified constitution. They must be ready to allow the gradual thawing of relations in their parties as well as in the government or honorably ship out. It only takes a politician who is completely unable to confront his or her own conscience to remain in a party or a government whose policies he or she vehemently abhors.

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

DEMOCRCY DEMANDS COUNTENANCE ON DIFFERENCES IN HONEST OPINIONS.

Debate on the fate of both Ministers and MPs who were opposed to the recently ratified constitution has become a national cause célèbre so much so that great remonstrance has arisen from many quarters. Some people have argued that because of their expressed opposition to the ratified constitution, parliament must lock them out of the Constitutional Implementation Oversight Committee (CIOC) and that the two principals must also cast the rebel ministers out of the Cabinet for the simple reason that they are likely to become stumbling blocks in the implementation of the ratified constitution.

These critics opine that failure by both parliament and the two principals taking drastic measures against the rebel ministers will be a very dangerous faux pas.

In my opinion, it is a non-sequitur to conclude that because of merely exercising their democratic right to oppose the proposed constitution they should be locked out of (CIOC) and sacked from cabinet altogether. We must forever be committed to the proposition that principles of democracy will never permit us to acquiesce to a move dictated by proscribing the inalienable rights of others. After all, the ratified constitution belongs to all of Kenyans irrespective of their vote during the referendum. This means that the legislation of laws necessary for the operationalization of a constitution cannot be achieved at the cost of proscribing those whose behavior is considered offensive to constitutionalism.

In any case, it is important to realize that in a coalition government such as ours, collective ministerial responsibility or party loyalty is something close to a myth. Here, unlike the Chinese proverb, “the crow must roost with the phoenix.” In other words, for reasons of political expediency, we have to exhibit some countenance on a whole complex of questions involving honest differences of opinion.

If, in their necessity to express their opinions during the referendum campaigns, they were offensive to anyone, it is quite unfortunate—the necessity must be obeyed. Criminalizing them on grounds of their past conduct or on the fear of their anticipated opposition to the legislation of the laws necessary for the operationalization of the ratified constitution is, in my estimation, a move fraught with dangers of excess and injustice and difficult to reconcile with best democratic principles. I am convinced that very little if any will be achieved by whittling away their individual liberties. In any case, what guarantees are there that the said “axis of evil” will not be active outside cabinet or CIOC?

I believe that if parliament, the civil society and the citizenry are vigilant enough, then we will be in a position to eternally guard against attempts of constitutional sabotage without the temptations to proscribe certain individuals from certain constitutional organs.

This is why the two principals in their wisdom have indicated that they will not accede to such inimical demands. The principals, like Eugene McCarthy understand, that, “being in politics is like being a football coach. You have to be smart enough to understand the game, and dumb enough to think it is important.”

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

BEWARE OF STRAW TELEVISION POLLS.

A number of television anchors from reputable media houses used “news polls” to consistently predict that the opponents of the proposed constitution would win the August plebiscite. The leadership of the No Team buoyed up by predictions of their success by the hitherto straw vote of the TV polls, rubbished as doctored the findings conducted by professional pollsters that indicated otherwise. Yet on the referendum day, the actual referendum results confounded both TV pollsters and the leadership of the naysayers. Proponents of the proposed constitution won with an unprecedented landslide margin.

This development has prompted many people to question whether it is proper for any Tom, Dick and Harry to purport to predict the outcome of an election based on a few text messages send by viewers either in support or against the proposed constitution.

Pundits fear that given the average or low literacy levels of many people, they are likely to believe such findings as gospel truth. The losers are likely to interpret an unfavorable outcome as arising out of an election malpractice, hence the risk of polarization. Just to put the scenario into proper perspective, a friend of mine bluntly told me that polls (TV) had forecasted a very big win for the naysayers and that any other outcome would be unacceptable. As I look back at the just concluded referendum, I shudder at what would have transpired had the referendum outcome been closely contested.

Unbeknown to many people, polling is a painstaking exercise that takes days or even months. This means that it can only be carried out by professionally trained pollsters. But even for trained pollsters, it still takes years of hard practice for them to release credible poll findings. It involves sampling, sampling units that must be representative, administration of a carefully thought out questionnaire, and interpretation of the data generated among many other professional requirements. It is not a matter of just receiving text messages and phone calls from viewers and hastily drawing untenable conclusions.

In any case, less than ten per cent of the Kenyan households have access to phones. Fewer even have television sets; hence participants in such a TV poll cannot be a true representative of the electorate. Furthermore, such findings suffer from credibility since they lack external validity and can thus not be generalized beyond the limited scope of the TV poll itself.

TOME FRANCIS,

BUMULA.

http://twitter.com/tomefrancis

INSTITUTIONALIZING LOW COST TEACHER CONTRACTING LIKELY TO KILL PROFESSION.

The trend to engage low cost teachers on short term contracts is rapidly increasing in many third world countries. To date, Niger has about half of its teaching force under short-term renewable contracts. Kenya, too, will beginning this month, employ new teachers on a three year renewable contract and they will be paid salaries far much less than those of their counterparts who are employed by the Teachers Service Commission (TSC) on permanent and pensionable terms. It is believed that the move was necessitated by the pressure of limited government budgets for education and increased demand resulting from efforts to ensure universal access to education.

From the government`s standpoint, this plan points to a very glistening future in that it (government) will among other things have the plasticity to make decisions on contracting low cost teachers as well as to make better use of them with finances being the least of its worries.

However, many stakeholders are scared stiff with the way the government is determined to gloss over serious ethical and legal concerns surrounding the whole exercise. To begin with, unlike in countries like Niger where paraprofessionals (lesser trained, lesser paid and employed teaching staff) are contracted and paid comparatively better, in Kenya fully trained and certified primary and secondary teachers will be contracted and paid a net salary of Kshs10, 000 and Kshs 15,000 respectively. It is also worth noting that those to be contracted will not be entitled to travel, medical and housing allowances. On housing for instance, CAP 226 clause 9 of the Employment Act states that “…it is the responsibility of every employer to provide reasonable accommodation for each of his employees…” In the same vein, it is also expected that the employer will provide medical as well as travel allowances to his employees. On this count alone, it is obvious that the government is in direct violation of the Employment Act.

Secondly, from the teachers’ standpoint, it is feared that the government will use low cost teacher contracting as a caveat to limit both the annual and negotiated salary increases and allowances payable to teachers who are in the permanent and pensionable employment.
Thirdly, and most worrisome, is the fact that the government appears to be showing a blatant disregard of the teaching profession as is evidenced in the fact that it can subject an individual who has labored for at least four years in the university training as a teacher to a form of employment whose terms are most debasing. Pundits project a serious depletion of teachers in the next five years. They argue that more and more would be teachers will shun teaching as a career. Many of those already in the profession will exit due to lack of adequate motivation.

In addressing the serious shortfall, the government will resort to paraprofessionals (quacks). This is obviously a far cry from what was envisaged in sessional paper No.1 of 2005 in which quality management of the education sector coupled with better remuneration of the teaching workforce were cited as the bedrock to the attainment of Universal Education for All(UFA) by 2015.

According to Dr. Alec Fyfe, an international consultant on education issues and a former staff member of the ILO and of UNICEF, low cost teacher contracting has an inverse relationship with the quality of education. He points out that the need to protect quality consequent on the use of low cost teacher contracting may very well nullify any intended cost savings.

From the foregoing, it is incumbent upon the government to rethink its strategy in managing education. The Kenyan Government must take its commitments under international standards soberly and appropriately. This entails devoting at least six per cent of the country`s national income to education. This, in my view, would make teaching an attractive profession which will in turn improve the quality of education in the country.

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

HOW TO CONCEDE DEFEAT IN AN ELECTION.

Granted, a concession speech is often performed as an awkward, perfunctory gesture at a time of devastating stress. A question arises then as to whether it is possible for one to concede an election defeat and at the same time succeed in burnishing one`s reputation? In my view, it is quite possible. First and foremost, one must elect to make an elaborate speech that converts the combative imagery of defeat into metaphors of sport, chivalry, and epic quest. It is instructive for the speaker to deliver a conceding speech that is crispy and brief.

Secondly and most important, such a speech must be couched in patriotism. In other words, even as one concedes, it is critical that the speech promises to bring down walls of mistrust between contestants in a manner that will enable them to see the possibility of harvesting shared advantages in years to come. Thirdly, even if one is smarting from a humiliating defeat, he is advised not to betray any emotions. One must keep his cool.

Finally, but most important is that the leader must actually concede defeat. This means that the he must not engage in sophistry. Furthermore, any attempts at scape-goating will negate the purpose of a concession. Instead it becomes a contestation. Unlike, conceding, contesting serves to further inflame passions.

Unfortunately, this is what I made of Honorable William Ruto`s press conference at the Bomas of Kenya. It (press conference) was meant to concede the referendum defeat. Instead, listening to the audio of his address we find that, contrary to our expectations, Ruto was not so much conceding defeat as he was contesting the vote outcome.

First, an obviously bitter Ruto blamed external interference for the referendum loss. Then he praised those who voted against the proposed constitution and called them “true gallant sons and daughters of this country who were not swayed by the government`s massive propaganda machine.” Let us stop here for a while and re-examine this statement in detail. Was Honorable Ruto in any way suggesting that the super majority that voted for the proposed constitution were cowards and weak kneed? Or is it my mind that is playing some dirty tricks on me?

You can also imagine my surprise when Ruto questions the legitimacy of the ratified constitution on the grounds that it fell short of the international threshold. We all know that over seventy one per cent of the eligible voters turned out to vote. Sixty nine per cent of those who voted endorsed it.

But even more serious, is when Ruto says that a team (from both camps) must be constituted with a view to dialogue over the contentious issues before the promulgation of the new constitution. I interpret this remark to contain a veiled threat whose intent is obviously to torpedo parliament’s attempts at legislating new laws necessary for the operationalization of the ratified constitution in the event that his wish is not granted. This seems to me an awfully strange and rather
counterproductive move not only to constitutionalism but to democracy as well.

But, going back to the tutorial on conceding defeat, does anyone out there think that all these rhetoric was necessary in Ruto`s concession speech? Absolutely not, if you ask me. He only succeeded in ending up not with an egg on his face but with an omelet.

I hope that he will find it prudent to call another press conference very soon so that he can concede defeat in a more diplomatic manner and speed up political reunification.

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

THE VOTERS` VERDICT IS OUT BUT THE REAL HURDLE TO CONSTITUTIONALISM STILL LOOMS LARGE.

The voters' verdict has left no room for any argument. Over sixty seven percent of those eligible to vote in the August 4 referendum went to the polls, and at least 69 percent of them cast their ballots for the proposed constitution.

While it is great jubilation for the proponents of the proposed constitution, the naysayers` leadership must be stunned at being buried by a landslide of unprecedented proportions. This margin puts to rest any fears on legitimacy as it clearly surpasses the international threshold requirement.

However, with the ratification of the proposed constitution, there is one last—and probably difficult hurdle to content with: reuniting the political class as well as the citizenry. It is worrying that even as we celebrate this accomplishment, the antipathy among the political class as well as the citizenry has gone a notch higher. If we allow this aversion to go on then it may have far-reaching effects on the quest for national cohesion.

Cognizant of the weight and sensibilities surrounding the just concluded referendum exercise, the two principals must immediately set the tone for the much needed national cohesion. They must endeavor to make the post referendum period a time for healing and a time for building the ties that bind our nationhood. It is therefore my sincere hope that in a gesture of national reconciliation and cohesion, they will find it most prudent not to sack nor force the cabinet ministers who went against the spirit of collective responsibility to resign. This gesture will send signals to all and sundry that our commitment to move forward as a united nation is paramount.

It is also extremely important that the political class makes an impassioned plea to the citizenry to understand the fact that the referendum outcome should not cause division but rather lift the morale of the nation and imbue it with a sense of unity so that together we can march with confidence into the great future. It is an open secret that political leaders have not made the case to tell the people living within the bounds of Kenya why they should care about one another. They (politicians) somehow, think that the evolution of a national identity will, one day, just happen, without anyone doing anything about it. It won`t.”

Lastly, as we move forward towards the fundamental alteration of our lives, I implore parliament to move with speed to put in place the necessary legislation for the implementation of the ratified constitution. The government too must ensure that there is an immediate and discernible will to prepare the citizenry for the transition process. This calls for the Government to immediately put in place civic education programmes to guide the citizenry on the transition process.

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

THE DEATH SENTENCE HAS NO PLACE IN THE MODERN SOCIETY.

A number of people have expressed their displeasure with the decision by the Court of Appeal to declare the death sentence unconstitutional. They (critics) opine that in the absence of the death sentence nothing would prevent the dangers arising out of individual’s self preservation and aggrandizement. In other words, they feel that this mode of punishment acts as a deterrence mechanism to prospective incidences of murder and other capital offences. Secondly, they feel that the death sentence is the only means through which the feelings of those affected by that act of murder are assuaged.

However, such arguments are only simplistic, emotional than rational. In my opinion, arguments for the removal of the death sentence from our penal code far outweigh the arguments for its inclusion.

To begin with, the argument that a murderer, having committed murder, he or she should therefore be paid back in equal measure, is rather untenable, since death of the murderer or suspected murderer does not in any way add value to the one murdered or his living relations. In fact, it is doubtable whether indeed it can possibly assuage the feelings of the affected, hence the universal maxim “two wrongs do not make a right.” From the foregoing, it is crystal clear that the death sentence would only be but destruction and waste of yet another valuable life.

Moreover, there is not a single research entity the world over that has adduced evidence beyond any reasonable doubt that the death penalty does act as an effective deterrence against prospective murderers nor is there any evidence that shows that it has minimized incidences of criminals committing other capital offences in the society. Perhaps it is out of this firm belief that last year President Kibaki challenged the social science researchers to bring forth any statistical evidence which conclusively proves the contrary.

Furthermore, even if perchance such statistical evidence is adduced, there would still be a spurious relation between the administration of the death penalty and reduced capital offences in that particular society. The observed relation may be based on an unforeseen connection with some other phenomenon. For instance, there could be likelihood that that the government and the civil society engaged in initiatives to create awareness to the citizenry on the importance of non-violent lifestyles.

It is also important to note that a number of countries have already done away with this mode of punishment for reasons that it has no place in the modern society. Let us therefore think of commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment.

TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.