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