The quest for fair political representation has been with us for quite a long time. It was first felt between 1961 and 1963 when Kenya held her first multi party elections. Later, the Kenyatta and Moi regimes aggravated the situation through the creation of more constituencies in total disregard to procedure, often with a view to favouring grandiose political interests. The net result was constituencies that varied greatly in population and size. However, because of the constricted democratic space no one could question such autocratic presidential decrees.
Today, most constituencies have populations that are well above or below the mean population of 133,000. Obviously, this huge variation of population across constituencies negates the ideal democratic principle of one-person-one vote. Joel Barkin`s in his essay titled “Designing Better Electoral Systems for Emerging Democracies” opines that rather than look at equal representation we should be looking at fair representation. This is because fair representation goes beyond geographical size and population. It acknowledges a host of other intervening factors as well. Barkin`s opines that “if the principle of one-person-one vote is respected and constituencies established with equal or nearly equal populations, then the principle of establishing constituencies that reflect communities of interest or "sparsely populated areas" will be violated.”
Cognizant of this challenge and buoyed by the people`s faith in the new constitution, parliament empowered the Ligale led IIBRC to come up with a formula that could best serve the country`s national democratic aspirations while balancing the country`s peculiarities. A hybrid formula was arrived at and parliament in its wisdom unanimously endorsed and adopted it.
However, at the back of our minds we always knew that there was a great deal of easily exploitable ignorance that was likely to scuttle the electoral review process courtesy of the PNU and ODM supremacy battles. And true to this expectation, the process suffered a major body blow on Tuesday when the high court issued writs putting on halt the gazettement of the new electoral units.
At the risk of sounding prejudicial, I must emphasize that this is a political process; it is therefore unlikely that the high court will defuse this brutal, drawn-out political fight mainly between the two political parties. If anything, it will only fuel the fight and make it impossible for a political consensus to be arrived at sooner than later. This delay would be costly given that article 89 clause 4 of the new constitution makes it explicitly clear on when to bring to life new electoral units.
It is also worth noting that the same article 89 clause eleven (11) states that an application for the review of the decision made by the boundaries commission can only be filed within thirty days of the publication of the decision in the Kenya Gazette. …” Currently, IIBRC has not published the new electoral units in the gazette. One therefore wonders the basis upon which the high court application was made.
It can only be that this sudden rush to court has nothing to do with fair representation. Behind this façade are legislators who have one thing in common-they all fear losing their seats to their perennial political rivals. They had all fervently wished that IIBRC would hive off additional constituencies from their existing constituencies in such a way as to placate their rivals to vie in the newly created electoral units.
Besides, it goes without saying that many of them are motivated by the morbid fear of how votes cast in the prospective election shall translate into seats won by political parties and by extension how the same seats shall determine who become(s) the country`s Chief Executive(s). This, in my view, is the very ghost of negative ethnicity that has presided over this country`s steady decline.
TOME FRANCIS,
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Monday, November 1, 2010
GRAFT WAR: POLITICAL PARTIES IN A BID TO FRANTICALLY COVER THEIR MUCK.
H.L Mencken once said that “A good politician is quite as unthinkable as an honest burglar.” I cannot agree more with him particularly looking at what is unfolding in the war against the run-away corruption in this country. For close to a decade, the un-exhilarating, even drab note in the management of this country`s affairs has been the reluctance by the executive and particularly the President and the Prime Minister in decisively dealing with the lengthening list of corrupt public officers given that most of those indicted are the apples of their eyes. At best the fight against corruption has assumed party lines with each political party shouting itself hoarse about the others share of scandals. This blame game has as of today even been upped.
Amidst the bustling cacophony—the drill-like whine and roar of politicians going hammer and tongs against each other, we are hearing something else that is even more sinister: that the reverberating echoes will soon be followed by a deafening silence to allow both PNU and ODM to frantically and evenly cover their muck in the face of an increasingly hostile KACC and the public.
This is because both parties have realized that shouting themselves hoarse while pointing soiled fingers at each other will not help them an inch in the new constitutional dispensation. This is why hushed talks abound that the two antagonists have for purposes of political convenience quickly come up with an amalgam of tortured compromises that will see the party stalwarts within their ranks and files escape any censure in parliament. But there is even more than meets the eye in this unconditional ceasefire.
Even more worrying is the treacherous talk about the two parties silent pact to de-tooth KACC in a bid to put a permanent closure to the many genies of Anglo-leasing, Goldenberg, Grand Regency, Triton, maize and water scandals among many others hovering high above the heads of their party stalwarts. The reasoning behind this move is that if these genies are not bottled fast enough the political dreams of these party stalwarts (stepping stones to be more precise) will be severely jolted. So will be the lofty dreams of some of the presidential torch bearers in the 2012 presidential election be jolted.
From the foregoing, it is crystal clear that none of these parties can claim to have the country`s future nor goodwill at heart. Their actions and inactions are indication of parties that are trapped in short-term, zero-sum-calculations, where each party`s perceived gains are seen as the other party`s losses.
To be more precise, the country is basically in the firm grip of two bankrupt parties that have are busy bankrupting it. Theirs is an ossified two-party system that lacks integrity and any sense of courage or high-aspiration in confronting the spiraling corruption that has permeated all the crevices in government. Neither do our hopes for a better future lie in the emerging nor yet to be launched political parties because they are but a spitting image of what ails the country.
In my considered opinion, the two parties alongside their respective affiliates must forthwith spare us the circus and the sideshows in and out of parliament. In any case, parliament, like a mall, is alive with the din of yipping and the shrill cacophony of caged parrots. The public is acutely aware of the fact that many of our legislators are nothing more than guns for hire.
In this regard, I demand that legislators completely relinquish the fight against corruption to KACC. It is only KACC that can impartially interrogate and indict public officers suspected to have presided over this country`s steady incremental decline. Let them allow KACC to sweep their stables spotlessly clean and those who survive the integrity test can then contest for leadership positions.
Lastly, I implore the conscientious public to be eternally vigilant and to resist any attempts by parliament to emasculate KACC.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Amidst the bustling cacophony—the drill-like whine and roar of politicians going hammer and tongs against each other, we are hearing something else that is even more sinister: that the reverberating echoes will soon be followed by a deafening silence to allow both PNU and ODM to frantically and evenly cover their muck in the face of an increasingly hostile KACC and the public.
This is because both parties have realized that shouting themselves hoarse while pointing soiled fingers at each other will not help them an inch in the new constitutional dispensation. This is why hushed talks abound that the two antagonists have for purposes of political convenience quickly come up with an amalgam of tortured compromises that will see the party stalwarts within their ranks and files escape any censure in parliament. But there is even more than meets the eye in this unconditional ceasefire.
Even more worrying is the treacherous talk about the two parties silent pact to de-tooth KACC in a bid to put a permanent closure to the many genies of Anglo-leasing, Goldenberg, Grand Regency, Triton, maize and water scandals among many others hovering high above the heads of their party stalwarts. The reasoning behind this move is that if these genies are not bottled fast enough the political dreams of these party stalwarts (stepping stones to be more precise) will be severely jolted. So will be the lofty dreams of some of the presidential torch bearers in the 2012 presidential election be jolted.
From the foregoing, it is crystal clear that none of these parties can claim to have the country`s future nor goodwill at heart. Their actions and inactions are indication of parties that are trapped in short-term, zero-sum-calculations, where each party`s perceived gains are seen as the other party`s losses.
To be more precise, the country is basically in the firm grip of two bankrupt parties that have are busy bankrupting it. Theirs is an ossified two-party system that lacks integrity and any sense of courage or high-aspiration in confronting the spiraling corruption that has permeated all the crevices in government. Neither do our hopes for a better future lie in the emerging nor yet to be launched political parties because they are but a spitting image of what ails the country.
In my considered opinion, the two parties alongside their respective affiliates must forthwith spare us the circus and the sideshows in and out of parliament. In any case, parliament, like a mall, is alive with the din of yipping and the shrill cacophony of caged parrots. The public is acutely aware of the fact that many of our legislators are nothing more than guns for hire.
In this regard, I demand that legislators completely relinquish the fight against corruption to KACC. It is only KACC that can impartially interrogate and indict public officers suspected to have presided over this country`s steady incremental decline. Let them allow KACC to sweep their stables spotlessly clean and those who survive the integrity test can then contest for leadership positions.
Lastly, I implore the conscientious public to be eternally vigilant and to resist any attempts by parliament to emasculate KACC.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
RUTO BRIGADE; WHY THE DEMAGOGIC DEMONIZATION OF THE PM IS A SMOKESCREEN.
In Kenya, scapegoating is a favorite pastime especially for politicians. A case in point is that of honorable William Ruto. Lately his rallies have been noted to consist of acres of soggy verbiage accusing the PM of single handedly masterminding his exit from the cabinet. If this rhetoric is to be believed then it would mean that the PM had to first make 'dangerous inroads' into the judiciary to convince the three high court judges to throw out Ruto`s application to stop the court case against him from being heard and determined. Considering the fact that the PM has not shown such propensity in the past and given the fact that he has been at the forefront in advocating for reforms in the judiciary, Ruto`s conjecture might as well be told to the birds.
Secondly, the PM must have then sweet talked President Kibaki to agree to suspend Ruto from the cabinet. This is again requires a bridge sturdier than mere verbiage and reasons more persuasive than clichés can provide considering that the PM and the President are strange bed fellows, so to speak.
Moreover, it is worthwhile remembering that Ruto had the last laugh when the PM suspended him earlier this year only for President Kibaki to disown the PMs decision. Ruto lambasted the PM stating categorically that he only takes orders from the appointing authority (read the president) and not the PM. Is it not strange that Ruto has the temerity to direct his unvarying and unconvincing flak at the PM when he knows too well who the appointing authority is?
What is even more intriguing is that instead of Ruto directing his energy at assembling evidence against his culpability, he has embarked on a politicization, posturing, and pandering course. If you ask me, either this is the height of illogic or there is much more than meets the eye. Since Ruto is such a brilliant politician I want to rule out any illiberal tendencies in his reasoning. Which then leads me to the next question; what is it that Ruto is trying to pull in his rallies? Was the decision by the three high court judges a bluff? I am tempted to believe so.
In my considered opinion, it was in Ruto`s interest that the case before him is dispensed with before 2012 to clear the way for him to contest the presidency-that is assuming that he is not indicted by ICC as he has previously stated in his rallies. The more I think about it the more I am convinced that Ruto (with the help of a certain cabal) had a hand in the suspect court ruling. The timing of this ruling could not have come at a better time than now. Having stage managed the court`s verdict it is the least surprising that Ruto is now exuding confidence that the court of law will vindicate him. Talk of a master puppeteer!
This could also explain why he is steeped in scapegoating and vilification of the PM as a means of distracting the public from the dangerous political games in Kenya`s political theatre of the absurd. This is why Ruto and his political brigade are too happy combining demagogic demonization and widespread scapegoating. Obviously, their intention is to engineer angry allegations in and out of parliament that can quickly turn into apocalyptic aggression targeting the PM.
But soon the disgrace of Ruto will become manifest when he realizes that the public will not fall for this ploy. Kenyans are dog tired of politicians who are always ready to find a scapegoat for the mounting public discontent with the monumental graft cases against them.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Secondly, the PM must have then sweet talked President Kibaki to agree to suspend Ruto from the cabinet. This is again requires a bridge sturdier than mere verbiage and reasons more persuasive than clichés can provide considering that the PM and the President are strange bed fellows, so to speak.
Moreover, it is worthwhile remembering that Ruto had the last laugh when the PM suspended him earlier this year only for President Kibaki to disown the PMs decision. Ruto lambasted the PM stating categorically that he only takes orders from the appointing authority (read the president) and not the PM. Is it not strange that Ruto has the temerity to direct his unvarying and unconvincing flak at the PM when he knows too well who the appointing authority is?
What is even more intriguing is that instead of Ruto directing his energy at assembling evidence against his culpability, he has embarked on a politicization, posturing, and pandering course. If you ask me, either this is the height of illogic or there is much more than meets the eye. Since Ruto is such a brilliant politician I want to rule out any illiberal tendencies in his reasoning. Which then leads me to the next question; what is it that Ruto is trying to pull in his rallies? Was the decision by the three high court judges a bluff? I am tempted to believe so.
In my considered opinion, it was in Ruto`s interest that the case before him is dispensed with before 2012 to clear the way for him to contest the presidency-that is assuming that he is not indicted by ICC as he has previously stated in his rallies. The more I think about it the more I am convinced that Ruto (with the help of a certain cabal) had a hand in the suspect court ruling. The timing of this ruling could not have come at a better time than now. Having stage managed the court`s verdict it is the least surprising that Ruto is now exuding confidence that the court of law will vindicate him. Talk of a master puppeteer!
This could also explain why he is steeped in scapegoating and vilification of the PM as a means of distracting the public from the dangerous political games in Kenya`s political theatre of the absurd. This is why Ruto and his political brigade are too happy combining demagogic demonization and widespread scapegoating. Obviously, their intention is to engineer angry allegations in and out of parliament that can quickly turn into apocalyptic aggression targeting the PM.
But soon the disgrace of Ruto will become manifest when he realizes that the public will not fall for this ploy. Kenyans are dog tired of politicians who are always ready to find a scapegoat for the mounting public discontent with the monumental graft cases against them.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
CONCERTED AND CONSULTATIVE EFFORTS NEEDED IN CURBING RISING STUDENT INDISCIPLINE.
Anyone in close contact with teachers knows that creating discipline and order in school is vital to teachers’ success. Unfortunately, curbing indiscipline in our schools is an extremely complex and difficult task. This difficulty arises out of the realization that other stakeholders have left this task in the hands of teachers alone. Worse still, some of them are working at cross purposes with teachers.
Buoyed up by the negligence and lackadaisical attitudes from these stakeholders, recalcitrant students see rigid or mechanistic school rules and regulations as attempts to curb their freedom. They therefore increasingly challenge and erode the teachers` authority. The consequence of this erosion has been terrible.
Many schools that were hitherto centers for academic excellence, character building and the dissemination of positive values have become relics and sites for gross indiscipline. Incidences of student strikes leading to senseless deaths and damage to property worth millions of shillings have become the order of the day.
Amid the chatter about the rising indiscipline in schools, the ministry of basic education is busy putting in place stringent student protectionist policies. These boardroom policies have succeeded in making the teacher the victim of circumstances. Such policies include empowering students to police teachers, forcing school administrators to establish roguish student councils and outlawing of corporal punishment without its effective replacement.
At this formative age, too much student freedom is synonymous to planting hybrid seeds in unhealthy soils. In other words, while it is not wrong to import solutions for discipline management from foreign cultures we must not forget that even though human beings throughout the world have essentially the same psychological structure; their cultures tend to make them different. We must therefore take care that in our quest to look “modern” we do not allow features of foreign culture to prevent teachers from maintaining sound, firm and appropriate action plans for curbing indiscipline in our schools. It is in fact touted that many school administrators are so scared of students that they would rather talk tough to teachers than students.
Unfortunately, whenever issues of gross indiscipline manifest themselves through such macabre acts as arson, parents unflinchingly indict teachers in their entirety. Interestingly, the basic education ministry has a penchant for lambasting teachers yet so many reports on indiscipline in schools are gathering dust on its shelves.
I think it is a high time that the government and the society at large stopped behaving like the proverbial ostrich. We need concerted and consultative efforts in curbing indiscipline in our schools.
Experience has taught us albeit the hard way that one cannot merely give instruction to disruptive, unruly and criminal elements in our schools on how to behave in socially acceptable ways. If that were the case, then, we should also be seeing our courts of law discarding the penal code and resorting to tutoring criminals on how to reform in the absence of corporal punishment. Common sense dictates that student indiscipline can be overcome by the well-known, time-tested principles of the rod alongside guiding and counseling strategies. Complicated, new-fangled boardroom policies are not needed.
Last but not least, parents must not become rooted in denial of their children`s misbehavior. Unfortunately many of them deliberately take sides with their children. Some of them have even initiated litigation against teachers for instituting disciplinary measures against their children. Society should know that teachers like all other human beings are risk averse. They too have a limit in terms of the pressure that they can handle. Beyond a certain level, stress takes toll on them. As a matter of fact, the colossal hostility and distrust from parents and the ministry of education has immensely contributed to teacher stress and burnout making many of them dysfunctional. In fact, barring a radical transformation in combating student indiscipline, I can hazard to predict a looming disaster for the basic education sector in the country.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Buoyed up by the negligence and lackadaisical attitudes from these stakeholders, recalcitrant students see rigid or mechanistic school rules and regulations as attempts to curb their freedom. They therefore increasingly challenge and erode the teachers` authority. The consequence of this erosion has been terrible.
Many schools that were hitherto centers for academic excellence, character building and the dissemination of positive values have become relics and sites for gross indiscipline. Incidences of student strikes leading to senseless deaths and damage to property worth millions of shillings have become the order of the day.
Amid the chatter about the rising indiscipline in schools, the ministry of basic education is busy putting in place stringent student protectionist policies. These boardroom policies have succeeded in making the teacher the victim of circumstances. Such policies include empowering students to police teachers, forcing school administrators to establish roguish student councils and outlawing of corporal punishment without its effective replacement.
At this formative age, too much student freedom is synonymous to planting hybrid seeds in unhealthy soils. In other words, while it is not wrong to import solutions for discipline management from foreign cultures we must not forget that even though human beings throughout the world have essentially the same psychological structure; their cultures tend to make them different. We must therefore take care that in our quest to look “modern” we do not allow features of foreign culture to prevent teachers from maintaining sound, firm and appropriate action plans for curbing indiscipline in our schools. It is in fact touted that many school administrators are so scared of students that they would rather talk tough to teachers than students.
Unfortunately, whenever issues of gross indiscipline manifest themselves through such macabre acts as arson, parents unflinchingly indict teachers in their entirety. Interestingly, the basic education ministry has a penchant for lambasting teachers yet so many reports on indiscipline in schools are gathering dust on its shelves.
I think it is a high time that the government and the society at large stopped behaving like the proverbial ostrich. We need concerted and consultative efforts in curbing indiscipline in our schools.
Experience has taught us albeit the hard way that one cannot merely give instruction to disruptive, unruly and criminal elements in our schools on how to behave in socially acceptable ways. If that were the case, then, we should also be seeing our courts of law discarding the penal code and resorting to tutoring criminals on how to reform in the absence of corporal punishment. Common sense dictates that student indiscipline can be overcome by the well-known, time-tested principles of the rod alongside guiding and counseling strategies. Complicated, new-fangled boardroom policies are not needed.
Last but not least, parents must not become rooted in denial of their children`s misbehavior. Unfortunately many of them deliberately take sides with their children. Some of them have even initiated litigation against teachers for instituting disciplinary measures against their children. Society should know that teachers like all other human beings are risk averse. They too have a limit in terms of the pressure that they can handle. Beyond a certain level, stress takes toll on them. As a matter of fact, the colossal hostility and distrust from parents and the ministry of education has immensely contributed to teacher stress and burnout making many of them dysfunctional. In fact, barring a radical transformation in combating student indiscipline, I can hazard to predict a looming disaster for the basic education sector in the country.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Sunday, October 17, 2010
HON. RUTO: REFUSAL TO RESIGN IS TANTAMOUNT TO FLAUNTING YOUR COLLOSAL MORAL DEFICIT.
It is a sad day for the people of Kenya. Public trust has gone to the dogs. Senior public officers indicted of criminal offenses can simply quote imaginary enemies as a reason for not resigning from public office. This is an egregious violation of the new constitution. Take the example of honorable William Ruto. He has flatly refused to heed the public`s call to resign ostensibly because he sees invisible hands behind the court ruling. The minister has even gone ahead to call a press conference to castigate the judiciary for being part and parcel of a protracted political campaign against him. Ruto and his political allies are wondering why this case has picked up steam at the time when his political strength is steadily rising.
It is not lost to the public that it is Ruto himself who referred the matter to the constitutional court. It is also not lost to the public that previously influential persons indicted for criminal offenses referred cases to the constitutional court so that the court would deep freeze justice or terminate the proceedings altogether. The delay in the ruling aside, Ruto should know better than making matters that are now before a court of law the subject of a press conference. Evidence against his culpability ought to be presented in the court of law and not in the court of public opinion.
Secondly, Ruto must know that the public`s call for his resignation is not a confirmation of his guilt. Far from it, his resignation should only be seen in light of the provisions of the new constitution that demand that a public officer who is a subject of a court case must resign from public office pending the determination of the case. It is also naïve for him to argue that his appointment to public office was done at a time when the same case was pending in court. He was appointed simply because no one knew whether the constitutional court would rule for or against the continuation of the case against him. It is now clear that he has a case to answer and as a public officer, he must act in accordance with the provisions of the new constitution-resign from public office.
Thirdly, by dismissing the public`s demands, honorable Ruto is only succeeding in justifying his colossal moral deficit. Instead of calling press conferences to throw his tantrums and to flaunt his endless fruitless political posturing, Ruto must know that his continued stay in the public office is a violation of the public trust. It is a testament of his final act of defiance against the public.
I think that Ruto will cause a tremendous amount of relief to the president, the PM, the cabinet and the country at large if he voluntarily stepped down. If the doesn’t resign the President and the PM must act in accordance with the provisions of the new constitution and relieve him of his duties.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
It is not lost to the public that it is Ruto himself who referred the matter to the constitutional court. It is also not lost to the public that previously influential persons indicted for criminal offenses referred cases to the constitutional court so that the court would deep freeze justice or terminate the proceedings altogether. The delay in the ruling aside, Ruto should know better than making matters that are now before a court of law the subject of a press conference. Evidence against his culpability ought to be presented in the court of law and not in the court of public opinion.
Secondly, Ruto must know that the public`s call for his resignation is not a confirmation of his guilt. Far from it, his resignation should only be seen in light of the provisions of the new constitution that demand that a public officer who is a subject of a court case must resign from public office pending the determination of the case. It is also naïve for him to argue that his appointment to public office was done at a time when the same case was pending in court. He was appointed simply because no one knew whether the constitutional court would rule for or against the continuation of the case against him. It is now clear that he has a case to answer and as a public officer, he must act in accordance with the provisions of the new constitution-resign from public office.
Thirdly, by dismissing the public`s demands, honorable Ruto is only succeeding in justifying his colossal moral deficit. Instead of calling press conferences to throw his tantrums and to flaunt his endless fruitless political posturing, Ruto must know that his continued stay in the public office is a violation of the public trust. It is a testament of his final act of defiance against the public.
I think that Ruto will cause a tremendous amount of relief to the president, the PM, the cabinet and the country at large if he voluntarily stepped down. If the doesn’t resign the President and the PM must act in accordance with the provisions of the new constitution and relieve him of his duties.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
HON. MICHUKI: THE COUNTRY CAN NO LONGER PUT UP WITH YOUR PENURIOUS BANKRUPT AGE.
Dear honorable Michuki,
If what I am about to tell you is an overstatement of the truth and is indicative of my unreasonable impatience, I beg your forgiveness. Sir, you have undoubtedly had a checkered political career. At one time you seem so patriotic and magnanimous in your duties that the public thinks of you as a prudent leader who, like wine, has matured with age. But at other times, you seem so drenched in odious schemes so much so that every Tom, Dick and Harry can clearly see that you are completely trapped in selfish desires.
In placing my assertions in proper context, I remember with a lot of nostalgia, the famous “Michuki rules” and how they helped restore sanity in the transport sector in this country. Today, I acknowledge the gusto and vivacity you have injected in the Environment Ministry.
But I also vividly remember the “Artur Brothers Saga” and the infamous raid of the standard media group. I have also not forgotten that a few years ago you said that the struggle for a new constitution was restricted to the removal of former President Moi from power and that since “one of your own” had assumed the presidency, there was no need for a new constitutional order. You have never reversed on your stance only that you belatedly supported the ratification of the new constitution not because of its inherent good but because you did not want a blot in the legacy of your “friend”. Sir, these things echo so loudly in the present that they send a shiver down my spine.
As if that was not enough, your recent raucous and rattling rhetoric is testament of a politician who is callously ossifying negative ethnicity in the country. Sir, I see in you a man so desperately welding the electorate into servile instruments. You cut across as one who does not respect individual freedom or the concepts of civil liberty. Your attitude is an excruciating embarrassment to the promises of democracy, equal access and equal opportunity as enshrined in the new constitution.
Sir, perhaps you are oblivious of the damage that your sentiments may trigger in this country, but as a youth of this country, I have every right to demand that you and your ilk bequeath to us a peaceful and cohesive country. Is it too much if I asked you to purge yourself of the ethnic venom lest the country pays dearly for the debts of your penurious bankrupt age?
Sir, whereas I am not opposed to anyone staking a claim to the presidency, I find it particularly offensive that you are insinuating that the only means to the coveted presidency is vide the odious ethnic merry-go-rounds by the populous ethnic groups in this country? But pray thee sir, where does this leave the rest of the ethnic minorities? Are they less Kenyan? Don`t you think that such thoughts would preside over this country`s steady incremental decline?
I thought that with your kind of your political experience that stretches all the way to the colonial days you should be the one rallying the public to nail in the coffin of bigotry, the nauseous qualifications to the presidency based on ethnicity, gender and religion. I thought that you should be the one imploring Kenyans not to be encumbered by past ethnic perceptions and loyalties. But I now realize how dead wrong I was.
I pray that the scales of negative ethnicity fall of your eyes. I pray that God grants you many more years so that you may witness your great grandchildren enjoy the scintillating beauty that will shine upon a truly cohesive Kenya.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
If what I am about to tell you is an overstatement of the truth and is indicative of my unreasonable impatience, I beg your forgiveness. Sir, you have undoubtedly had a checkered political career. At one time you seem so patriotic and magnanimous in your duties that the public thinks of you as a prudent leader who, like wine, has matured with age. But at other times, you seem so drenched in odious schemes so much so that every Tom, Dick and Harry can clearly see that you are completely trapped in selfish desires.
In placing my assertions in proper context, I remember with a lot of nostalgia, the famous “Michuki rules” and how they helped restore sanity in the transport sector in this country. Today, I acknowledge the gusto and vivacity you have injected in the Environment Ministry.
But I also vividly remember the “Artur Brothers Saga” and the infamous raid of the standard media group. I have also not forgotten that a few years ago you said that the struggle for a new constitution was restricted to the removal of former President Moi from power and that since “one of your own” had assumed the presidency, there was no need for a new constitutional order. You have never reversed on your stance only that you belatedly supported the ratification of the new constitution not because of its inherent good but because you did not want a blot in the legacy of your “friend”. Sir, these things echo so loudly in the present that they send a shiver down my spine.
As if that was not enough, your recent raucous and rattling rhetoric is testament of a politician who is callously ossifying negative ethnicity in the country. Sir, I see in you a man so desperately welding the electorate into servile instruments. You cut across as one who does not respect individual freedom or the concepts of civil liberty. Your attitude is an excruciating embarrassment to the promises of democracy, equal access and equal opportunity as enshrined in the new constitution.
Sir, perhaps you are oblivious of the damage that your sentiments may trigger in this country, but as a youth of this country, I have every right to demand that you and your ilk bequeath to us a peaceful and cohesive country. Is it too much if I asked you to purge yourself of the ethnic venom lest the country pays dearly for the debts of your penurious bankrupt age?
Sir, whereas I am not opposed to anyone staking a claim to the presidency, I find it particularly offensive that you are insinuating that the only means to the coveted presidency is vide the odious ethnic merry-go-rounds by the populous ethnic groups in this country? But pray thee sir, where does this leave the rest of the ethnic minorities? Are they less Kenyan? Don`t you think that such thoughts would preside over this country`s steady incremental decline?
I thought that with your kind of your political experience that stretches all the way to the colonial days you should be the one rallying the public to nail in the coffin of bigotry, the nauseous qualifications to the presidency based on ethnicity, gender and religion. I thought that you should be the one imploring Kenyans not to be encumbered by past ethnic perceptions and loyalties. But I now realize how dead wrong I was.
I pray that the scales of negative ethnicity fall of your eyes. I pray that God grants you many more years so that you may witness your great grandchildren enjoy the scintillating beauty that will shine upon a truly cohesive Kenya.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Friday, October 8, 2010
POLITICIANS MUST SPARE US THIS FLAGRANCY OF REASON.
In her book titled “Preaching Proverbs”, Alice M McKenzie says that “powerful paranoia is perfect sense.” The truth of her assertion hit me like a bombshell when some renegade ODM legislators in the flagrancy of reason waxed lyrical about the “Pentagon” instigating the 2008 PEV. Their rhetoric may have passed as useful idiocy but it failed to score even on that front too. Instead they only succeeded in exposing a litany of lies and sheer wackiness. In their utter desperation they thought that such antics will make the ICC investigators to retreat from the threshold of reasonable and meaningful investigations.
These unfortunate remarks instantaneously re-energized a section of hawkish PNU legislators. They quickly called a press conference to demand that ICC investigates the ‘Pentagon” for masterminding the 2008 atrocities. Never mind that these legislators had previously (albeit unsuccessfully) tried to implant in their constituents a narcissistic sense of victimization by the ICC.
It is worth noting that all these legislators seem to be driven only by one agenda-they all have paranoia for the Prime Minister. They all want to distort the truth so that every issue becomes a contest between the “purity” of their tribal chiefs versus the “evil” of the Prime Minister, Raila Odinga. These politicians cannot think about the overall public good because they are trapped in short term, zero-sum calculations, where Raila`s gains in public opinion is seen as their collective loss. This explains their palpable paranoia with Raila.
It is not that these legislators have a short memory as to easily forget what really transpired in the early days of 2008. They know for sure that Raila more than anyone else was a victim of the most foul play. By constantly throwing barbs at him at any opportune moment, anyone can see that it is the ossification of the same vile schemes, only that now former foes have united not just to cheat justice but to ensure that Raila does not clinch the presidency.
It is little wonder that these politicians have even enlisted the services of an effete political pundit who at one point opined that Raila was the sacrificial lamb for the birth of a democratic nation. The same pundit is now opining that the ICC is after both president Kibaki and the PM.
But is there evidence of Raila`s culpability in the 2008 PEV? I do not think so. In discounting the pundit`s white lies, it is important that we travel down memory lane. During the 2007 disputed elections the ODM party had two clear options on its table- one favoring mass action and another attempting to maintain negotiations. The ODM leadership felt that the two strategies were fundamentally complementary.
However, the kind of mass action envisaged was similar to that of the 2005 Ukrainian “Orange Revolution.” Unbeknown to the ODM leadership there were some people who were desperately looking for an opportunity to stamp their unrivalled supremacy in the Rift Valley politics. They therefore deliberately misconstrued (as they have admitted in their very recent remarks) the centrality of the mass action approach to mean inciting and funding their constituents as well as private militias to unleash the cruelest kind of atrocities (such as the Kiambaa massacre) to the supporters of PNU.
On the other hand, the PNU (read government), held a series of strategy meetings with a view to restoring calm in the country. However, like in ODM there were some powerful individuals within PNU who wanted to be seen as the guardian angels of their community. They, without the blessing of the government, sanctioned repression and retaliatory attacks against people who were deemed sympathetic to ODM in places such as Naivasha.
It is these deep-pocketed benefactor(s) who in their capacity as private citizens compromised state security agents and funded organized militia groups to commit serious crimes against humanity that the ICC seeks to bring to book.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
These unfortunate remarks instantaneously re-energized a section of hawkish PNU legislators. They quickly called a press conference to demand that ICC investigates the ‘Pentagon” for masterminding the 2008 atrocities. Never mind that these legislators had previously (albeit unsuccessfully) tried to implant in their constituents a narcissistic sense of victimization by the ICC.
It is worth noting that all these legislators seem to be driven only by one agenda-they all have paranoia for the Prime Minister. They all want to distort the truth so that every issue becomes a contest between the “purity” of their tribal chiefs versus the “evil” of the Prime Minister, Raila Odinga. These politicians cannot think about the overall public good because they are trapped in short term, zero-sum calculations, where Raila`s gains in public opinion is seen as their collective loss. This explains their palpable paranoia with Raila.
It is not that these legislators have a short memory as to easily forget what really transpired in the early days of 2008. They know for sure that Raila more than anyone else was a victim of the most foul play. By constantly throwing barbs at him at any opportune moment, anyone can see that it is the ossification of the same vile schemes, only that now former foes have united not just to cheat justice but to ensure that Raila does not clinch the presidency.
It is little wonder that these politicians have even enlisted the services of an effete political pundit who at one point opined that Raila was the sacrificial lamb for the birth of a democratic nation. The same pundit is now opining that the ICC is after both president Kibaki and the PM.
But is there evidence of Raila`s culpability in the 2008 PEV? I do not think so. In discounting the pundit`s white lies, it is important that we travel down memory lane. During the 2007 disputed elections the ODM party had two clear options on its table- one favoring mass action and another attempting to maintain negotiations. The ODM leadership felt that the two strategies were fundamentally complementary.
However, the kind of mass action envisaged was similar to that of the 2005 Ukrainian “Orange Revolution.” Unbeknown to the ODM leadership there were some people who were desperately looking for an opportunity to stamp their unrivalled supremacy in the Rift Valley politics. They therefore deliberately misconstrued (as they have admitted in their very recent remarks) the centrality of the mass action approach to mean inciting and funding their constituents as well as private militias to unleash the cruelest kind of atrocities (such as the Kiambaa massacre) to the supporters of PNU.
On the other hand, the PNU (read government), held a series of strategy meetings with a view to restoring calm in the country. However, like in ODM there were some powerful individuals within PNU who wanted to be seen as the guardian angels of their community. They, without the blessing of the government, sanctioned repression and retaliatory attacks against people who were deemed sympathetic to ODM in places such as Naivasha.
It is these deep-pocketed benefactor(s) who in their capacity as private citizens compromised state security agents and funded organized militia groups to commit serious crimes against humanity that the ICC seeks to bring to book.
TOME FRANCIS,
BUMULA.
http://twitter.com/tomefrancis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)