Rebirth of a nation

Prof Oyugi says Kenyans must be vigilant as post-referendum realignments unfold in the political class.

“The greatest enemy Kenya faces now is a familiar one. Conservative forces have repeatedly thwarted progress by forming anti-reform alliances under the guise of ‘national unity’ and ‘national reconciliation.’

Feel threatened

“That is what wiped out the gains the Mau Mau fought for. This time round, there are those agitating for changes to the document, such as the members of the ‘No’ team. There are others on the podium of victory that actually represent the status quo and feel threatened by change. Those are the players that can subvert the process.”

These warnings are necessary in a nation that has experienced too many false starts in the past. Independence was famously followed by ideological wars among the political class that swiftly descended into ethnic-based wrangling.

Those wars polarised the nation and sowed the seeds of every single major political crisis in post-independence Kenya.

The introduction of multi-partyism in 1992 sent hopes for change soaring, only for the celebrations to prove cruelly premature. Ten years later, Kenya was held up anew as an African example.

The main political players united to hand Kanu a crushing blow, becoming the first country in the region to topple a ruling party in comprehensive fashion.

Economic gains followed and under Narc, Kenya consolidated its place as Sub-Saharan Africa’s biggest non-mineral economy.

But the monster of ethnicity refused to die and the divisions that tore Narc apart directly led to the bloody post-election crisis.

That disaster set the stage for the latest round of reforms whose capstone was the newly-endorsed constitution.

There are a number of reasons to hope the new dawn will prove different. The proposed constitution is crafted in a fashion that democratises political power by putting the people at the heart of most structures of governance.

The process of implementation is one example. There are fears that MPs may sabotage the effort to pass legislation required to make the new law operational.

But such a decision will come at a high cost because the proposed constitution recommends the dissolution of Parliament if MPs fail to meet the deadlines set out in the transitional clauses of the new constitution.

According to Article 261 (5,6,7) “If Parliament fails to enact any particular legislation within the specified time, any person may petition the High Court on the matter. The High Court in determining (such a) petition may... transmit an order directing Parliament and the Attorney-General to take steps to ensure that the required legislation is enacted within the period specified in order, and to report the progress to the Chief Justice.

“If Parliament fails to enact (the) legislation... within the period specified in the order... the Chief Justice shall advise the President to dissolve Parliament and the President shall dissolve Parliament.”

Those are some of the provisions that have fed optimism that politicians will hesitate to subvert the law due to the overwhelming mandate the new law received.

Devolution, the second chamber of Parliament, the equalisation fund and the envisioned reduction of the powers of the Treasury in allocating resources mean the people will play a greater role in governing themselves than they have since independence.