Dialogue sounds good, but potholes ahead look nasty and intimidating

Cord leader Raila Odinga addresses Mombasa residents during the issuance of student bursary at ASK Show Ground on May 28, 2016. Cord says it suspended the protests “temporarily” in solidarity with those who lost lives. PHOTO | KEVIN ODIT | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • Cord, through Senator James Orengo, says they desire a format where the Opposition principals negotiate face-to-face with the top Jubilee leadership.
  • In the matter of the IEBC, whatever such a round-table agrees on must have to go to back to Parliament anyway for enforcement.
  • The Kriegler Report, which I don’t know whether anybody remembers or cares for anymore, specifically recommended the IEBC be in place at least two years before an election is held.

Dialogue, all people of goodwill agree, is a worthy thing. Yet in a fresh display of the go-for-broke brinkmanship we are stuck in, Cord’s offer to suspend their demos was not met with universal praise.

Jubilee hardliners chaffed at the very notion of the other side putting conditions and ultimatums.

Their fringe counterparts in Cord went fiery on social media against their leaders about their “revolution” having been “aborted” even as it was gaining momentum, and after people had died.

Cord says it suspended the protests “temporarily” in solidarity with those who lost lives.

The opposition coalition promised to resume the demos if Jubilee does not open lines of dialogue by this week.

Word is that the church people were instrumental in urging moderation. There were murmurs of another hidden hand behind Cord’s tactical retreat — certain Western embassies.

They may or may not have threatened individual visa bans.

This might not be a good time to be a pessimist, but I will be surprised if this proposed dialogue pans out well.

Already you can hear of an early impasse on the very definition of the word “dialogue”. Both sides do agree on what they call “structured dialogue”.

But exactly what and how this should be is lost in translation.

The ruling side insists any dialogue must be through Parliament. The other side rejects outright going the parliamentary route. And what exactly is a “structured dialogue?”

Jubilee is adamant it must be within the Constitution. Cord, through Senator James Orengo, says they desire a format where the Opposition principals negotiate face-to-face with the top Jubilee leadership.

He adds that the talks must be convened at “the highest possible level,” meaning by the President.

Jubilee will resist this, and is already doing it. Expect the second impasse to come in at this stage.

But even if this cherished round-table is convened, will it be confined to the stated goal of the IEBC’s removal? There are reasons to doubt this.

BACK TO PARLIAMENT

It looks like there is more Cord is holding out for, possibly inclusive of the issues it sought to canvass through “Okoa Kenya”, which were separate from the IEBC matter. Here will be the third impasse.

Strictly speaking, Parliament will cease to be the only relevant forum if it’s a different kind of conversation Cord has in mind.

Yet this will bring with it much wider complexities. Would such issues, which supersede the IEBC, ultimately require a referendum to entrench in law?

Or how does one go around this? In the matter of the IEBC, whatever such a round-table agrees on must have to go to back to Parliament anyway for enforcement.

Supposing Parliament acts urgently in a bipartisan way and recommends removal of the IEBC commissioners? Will the calls for dialogue end?

Again, there is reason to doubt this. What next will be up for contention? Your guess is as good as mine. As of now, the Legal Affairs Committee of Parliament is discussing a draft Bill on who should appoint new commissioners.

Ordinary Kenyans need more clarity on where IEBC went wrong. Recently there were reports that the EACC had completed its investigations on the “Chickengate” affair and handed the file to the DPP to prosecute suspects.

Also the other day Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee did a report that recommended action on three IEBC commissioners over questionable acquisition of BVR kits. (This was marred by allegations that some MPs had sought bribes from the commissioners so as to water down the report). Is there more in store?

Aside from the selective forensic audit done on the 2013 balloting when the matter was before the Supreme Court, maybe it is time a more comprehensive one was done to ascertain once and for all if there was any rigging in that election as alleged.

THE REAL ISSUE

We also need a clear explanation how the breakdown of BVR kits (as with all gadgets, they have broken down in many countries, like Ghana) is being linked to vote manipulation.

Removing IEBC commissioners alone will not be a foolproof guarantee that one or the other coalition should suddenly feel safe about the next election.

Most problems with electoral commissions arise within the secretariat, where the real work is done.

And when actual elections begin, it is the lowly electoral clerks who do the vote tallying and can easily stuff ballots.

The catch in dismantling the entire secretariat is that it will mean the next election cannot possibly be held in 2017.

The Kriegler Report, which I don’t know whether anybody remembers or cares for anymore, specifically recommended the IEBC be in place at least two years before an election is held.