With the High court having declared the President`s act unconstitutional, all eyes turned on the House speaker to see whether his ruling could leave another egg on the President`s face. He stopped short of doing that but not without chiding the President for the manner in which he is determined to ride roughshod over the constitutional rights of the public regarding equity, fairness and justice for all. Thanks to the speaker the president has a window of opportunity to reflect and perhaps unmake the Emiliogate Scandal.
The Emiliogate Scandal as it has come to be popularly known was born out of the dizzying shuttle diplomacy that culminated in the suspect nominations into the constitutional offices. Kibaki`s adamant and intransigent stance to stick with his scandalized nominations lend credence to the theory that he is not only hell bent on riding roughshod over the country`s democratic ethos but that he has no intention whatsoever of pursuing justice for the 2008 PEV victims. The reason why he is hiding behind the obscure term “consultation” is such that his vile intentions cannot be ferreted out.
Kibaki`s move was not unexpected as his actions show that he has consistently pursued personal agenda at the expense of the Kenyan people. However, this time round Kibaki bit more than he could chew. His presidency has fallen into the worst faux pas since his being sworn into office in the ungodly hours of the day.
The Emiliogate Scandal has broken the people`s silence. It has given rise to flashfloods of people's resentment and protests. These protests are growing bigger by the day; the whirlwinds of anger are getting fiercer by the hour. These whirlwinds will sweep away all the litter and dirt along their vigorous paths as it increasingly becomes crystal clear to everyone that the Kibaki presidency has become unresponsive to their quest for justice, fairness and equity.
Apparently, his is a presidency that is increasingly serving the selfish interests of his protégés. By his logic Kibaki would rather condemn the Kenyan people to more years of illegitimate, fraudulent, unfeeling and corrupt governance, rather than heed the people's call for justice, fairness and equity! People are bound to break their silence and speak against his actions.
In the classic song "The Sound of Silence," Simon and Garfunkel remind us that "silence is like a cancer that grows." Taken to mean from a sociological viewpoint, that the "silent majority" may be silent for some time but not for long. Yes, rage can be silent, but as the saying goes, "Silent waters run deep." Silent waters can transform into raging waters. We have seen it in the Maghreb states. The signs are ominous in Kenya too.
In the wisdom of Kenneth Marende, it is not yet too late, the President can remedy the situation. And I want to agree with Marende that Kibaki truly has a choice. At the very least, he can nullify the nominations. This is so because no amount of cosmetics can mask the ugly countenance of his actions. If he heeds the Marende`s advice I am sure that the Kenyan people will respect him. His legacy will remain intact. After all, a good name (in history) is priceless. I only hope that Kibaki understands the great value of the opportunity that now lies before him.
I wish to remind the President as well as the legislators who are palsy walsy about his decision that true democracy demands consistency of struggle, not the cheap expediency of tactical alliances. Wheeling-dealing is not for true democrats.
Finally, I pray that God saves this country and its citizenry from reckless lawmakers who do not care about the harmful effects of their grandstanding on our people who are the hapless victims of their verbal tussles.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
AFRICAN HEADS OF STATES MUST STOP UNDERMINING ICC.
So the African Heads of States under the auspices of the African Union (AU) have unanimously endorsed President Kibaki`s request to have Kenya`s case at the Hague be deferred by the United Nations Security Council. They have alleged that the Hague based trials would be ignoring Kenya`s raison d'être as well as undermining Kenya`s sovereignty and the dignity of the African continent at large. Their protégés too have been lithe and active in leading the ICCs demonization.
Besides the African Heads of States have also unanimously agreed to go slow over their Comrade in Chief in Ivory Coast who has blatantly refused to hand over power to the real winner of the country`s general election.
It must also not be forgotten that only last year at Munyonyo Commonwealth Resort in Kampala the African Heads of States unflinchingly reiterated that subjecting a “sovereign head of state” to a warrant of arrest is undermining African solidarity and African peace and security.”
Sadly, the AUs decision points at African Heads of States who are increasingly determined to shield themselves and their protégés from prosecution for crimes against humanity or genocide. In the pretext of local mechanisms coupled with cosmetic peace and reconciliation initiatives, they want to be given carte blanche to perpetuate impunity. 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 objectives of the ICC. This will definitely lead to increased human rights violations in the continent 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 impunity against his own citizens. The world will never let go unpunished such tragic bloodletting.
The public and the International community must be warned to be wary of those who
are desperately trying to accuse ICC of ignoring this region`s political realities. Such arguments are as misleading as they are false. With respect to Kenya`s case, suffice it to say that nobody is against Kenya`s bid to have a local judicial mechanism but the only problem is that we have not demonstrated honesty in the establishment of a credible local judicial mechanism. The process is fraught with all sorts of schemes including suspect nominations aimed at defenestrating justice. It is with a lot of consternation to thus hear that the AU is in full support of such a mockery of justice in the country. The AU and IGAD were never intended to be the washing powder for the merchants of doom. Simply put, their pronouncements are huge diplomatic gaffes.
Kenya must therefore not be emboldened by the Aus pronouncement into flaunting 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.
I wish to remind the African Heads of States of the import of Thomas Jefferson`s edict that states that “Where the people fear the government there is tyranny, where the government fears the people there is liberty.” In other words democracy is not meant to be a concentration of monopolized socio-political power in the hands a few so-called” Heads of States.” Whether these Heads of States have the backing of their deeply ethnicized parliaments is immaterial. We must remind them that any popular consensus that flies in the face of justice for all is not democracy but anarchy.
The citizens of Africa must not succumb to the dark impulses that lurk in the schemes of the African Heads of States lest the African continent falls in the worst possible crisis. So far we are encouraged by the popular uprising in the Maghreb states. Paced by economic doldrums, political friction and repression, the measure of resentment toward the African Heads of States has reached unsustainable levels. It is my prayer that this domino effect continues until the last of the remaining dictators are swept away.
The citizens of Africa expect that even in the absence of divine intervention, the fundamental principle of morality must always govern the actions of the African Heads of States. Any decision undertaken by these Heads of States must be based on the Utilitarian pragmatic ethos of the Greatest Happiness Principle which seeks a course of action that is most likely to produce the greatest good (in terms of satisfaction, pleasure, happiness) for the greatest number of people. Anything less results in tyranny, moral depreciation and social breakdown!!!
Besides the African Heads of States have also unanimously agreed to go slow over their Comrade in Chief in Ivory Coast who has blatantly refused to hand over power to the real winner of the country`s general election.
It must also not be forgotten that only last year at Munyonyo Commonwealth Resort in Kampala the African Heads of States unflinchingly reiterated that subjecting a “sovereign head of state” to a warrant of arrest is undermining African solidarity and African peace and security.”
Sadly, the AUs decision points at African Heads of States who are increasingly determined to shield themselves and their protégés from prosecution for crimes against humanity or genocide. In the pretext of local mechanisms coupled with cosmetic peace and reconciliation initiatives, they want to be given carte blanche to perpetuate impunity. 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 objectives of the ICC. This will definitely lead to increased human rights violations in the continent 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 impunity against his own citizens. The world will never let go unpunished such tragic bloodletting.
The public and the International community must be warned to be wary of those who
are desperately trying to accuse ICC of ignoring this region`s political realities. Such arguments are as misleading as they are false. With respect to Kenya`s case, suffice it to say that nobody is against Kenya`s bid to have a local judicial mechanism but the only problem is that we have not demonstrated honesty in the establishment of a credible local judicial mechanism. The process is fraught with all sorts of schemes including suspect nominations aimed at defenestrating justice. It is with a lot of consternation to thus hear that the AU is in full support of such a mockery of justice in the country. The AU and IGAD were never intended to be the washing powder for the merchants of doom. Simply put, their pronouncements are huge diplomatic gaffes.
Kenya must therefore not be emboldened by the Aus pronouncement into flaunting 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.
I wish to remind the African Heads of States of the import of Thomas Jefferson`s edict that states that “Where the people fear the government there is tyranny, where the government fears the people there is liberty.” In other words democracy is not meant to be a concentration of monopolized socio-political power in the hands a few so-called” Heads of States.” Whether these Heads of States have the backing of their deeply ethnicized parliaments is immaterial. We must remind them that any popular consensus that flies in the face of justice for all is not democracy but anarchy.
The citizens of Africa must not succumb to the dark impulses that lurk in the schemes of the African Heads of States lest the African continent falls in the worst possible crisis. So far we are encouraged by the popular uprising in the Maghreb states. Paced by economic doldrums, political friction and repression, the measure of resentment toward the African Heads of States has reached unsustainable levels. It is my prayer that this domino effect continues until the last of the remaining dictators are swept away.
The citizens of Africa expect that even in the absence of divine intervention, the fundamental principle of morality must always govern the actions of the African Heads of States. Any decision undertaken by these Heads of States must be based on the Utilitarian pragmatic ethos of the Greatest Happiness Principle which seeks a course of action that is most likely to produce the greatest good (in terms of satisfaction, pleasure, happiness) for the greatest number of people. Anything less results in tyranny, moral depreciation and social breakdown!!!
Thursday, December 16, 2010
THE ICC PROCESS IS NOT A CIRCUS OF NITWITS.
In the aftermath of the naming of the six suspects, I was disgusted as I watched legislators pour vitriol at the International Criminal Court (ICC) as well as Luis Moreno-Ocampo, the ICC prosecutor. Those who spoke were hysterical and demagogical ostensibly because the ICC`s list of suspects was at variance with their secret wish lists. Some even went forth to publicly demonstrate their intellectual dishonesty and incompetency by opining that the ICC ought to have included the names of the two principals on its list of suspects. They conveniently forgot that ICC is after criminal and not political responsibility relating to the 2007 PEV.
It must also not be forgotten that only a few days ago the same legislators waxed lyrical about Kenya disengaging from the ICC led retributive process because some unnamed ODM legislator was sighted having a quiet a tete a tete with the ICC prosecutor perhaps finalizing on the scheme to execute politically motivated indictments. Again, one can only conclude that this claim is not only wacky and utterly without basis but also a seduction of the most oppressive kind whose intention is clear as crystal. You do not need a law degree or a Ph.D. to see right through such wild allegations. All that these legislators want to do is to callously engender fear and animosity, appealing to people`s ethnic identities, fomenting disturbances and filling people`s ears with all sorts of inflammatory rhetoric.
It should be clear to these legislators that their antics will not make the ICC to retreat from the threshold of reasonable and meaningful investigations.
Much as I recognize and respect these legislators` constitutional right to freely express themselves, I am extremely worried that their outrageous claims are likely to sow confusion, or worse, further create a wedge in a multi-ethnic populace such as ours. The conduct of these legislators contravenes article 33 (2) of the Kenya constitution for which they should be placed under the bar of justice.
It must not be forgotten that some of these legislators were seen chest thumping that international justice would take eternity before they are indicted and presented before the International court to answer to charges of crimes against humanity. Now that the storm of justice has started swirling around them they are desperately trying to peddle cheap lies to save themselves from the ignominy of having shot themselves in the leg.
They are now opining that by submitting ourselves to the ICC we have allowed a foreign national to trample upon our sovereignty. What hogwash. When did sovereignty mean ducking out of giving hundreds of thousands of PEV victims the redress they deserve? Does “sovereignty” mean turning the victims’ quest for justice into a revolving array of musical chairs dependent on the political caprices of a rowdy few? Whatever tricks they employ justice will surely be delivered for in the words of Edgar Samuel Poe, “truth has a way of beating through the best-laid alibis.”
It must also not be forgotten that only a few days ago the same legislators waxed lyrical about Kenya disengaging from the ICC led retributive process because some unnamed ODM legislator was sighted having a quiet a tete a tete with the ICC prosecutor perhaps finalizing on the scheme to execute politically motivated indictments. Again, one can only conclude that this claim is not only wacky and utterly without basis but also a seduction of the most oppressive kind whose intention is clear as crystal. You do not need a law degree or a Ph.D. to see right through such wild allegations. All that these legislators want to do is to callously engender fear and animosity, appealing to people`s ethnic identities, fomenting disturbances and filling people`s ears with all sorts of inflammatory rhetoric.
It should be clear to these legislators that their antics will not make the ICC to retreat from the threshold of reasonable and meaningful investigations.
Much as I recognize and respect these legislators` constitutional right to freely express themselves, I am extremely worried that their outrageous claims are likely to sow confusion, or worse, further create a wedge in a multi-ethnic populace such as ours. The conduct of these legislators contravenes article 33 (2) of the Kenya constitution for which they should be placed under the bar of justice.
It must not be forgotten that some of these legislators were seen chest thumping that international justice would take eternity before they are indicted and presented before the International court to answer to charges of crimes against humanity. Now that the storm of justice has started swirling around them they are desperately trying to peddle cheap lies to save themselves from the ignominy of having shot themselves in the leg.
They are now opining that by submitting ourselves to the ICC we have allowed a foreign national to trample upon our sovereignty. What hogwash. When did sovereignty mean ducking out of giving hundreds of thousands of PEV victims the redress they deserve? Does “sovereignty” mean turning the victims’ quest for justice into a revolving array of musical chairs dependent on the political caprices of a rowdy few? Whatever tricks they employ justice will surely be delivered for in the words of Edgar Samuel Poe, “truth has a way of beating through the best-laid alibis.”
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
FURORE WITH IIBRC HAS LITTLE TO DO WITH THE PRINCIPLES AND VALUES OF FAIR REPRESENTATION.
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
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)