Heated contests in governor races are sign of success of devolution

The bitter battles for the positions of Governor and Member of County Assembly will be among the highlights of the 2017 election.

There are legitimate worries that there will be violence at the grassroots both during the heavily contested primaries and in the General Election.

Looking at the half-full side of the glass, though, the fact the stakes are so high in the battle for governor means that Kenya’s experiment with devolution is going the right way.

There are legitimate concerns about the downsides of devolution. Corruption is a genuine problem and many governors have become exceedingly rich.

Misplaced priorities and misallocation of resources are commonplace. The 18 helicopters, many that brought in governors to the funeral of Nyeri Governor Nderitu Gachagua, were a graphic example of the lack of wisdom among many of the first batch of county chief executives.

THE POSITIVES

But consider the positives. An American academic who follows African elections and the democratic process on the continent made an interesting point in a conversation last week.

Basically, that few countries in the world had reacted to a political crisis with reforms as wide ranging as those implemented in Kenya between 2008 and 2013.

It is a fact that is easy to miss when you look at things within Kenya, with all the gloom-laden narratives we consume regularly.

But when you examine the situation through a comparative lens, Kenya is in a far better position today than it was in 2007.

The post-election crisis following the disputed presidential election result was triggered partly because the stakes were so high.

VAST RICHES

The “imperial presidency” was the sole prize on offer. Winning that office opens the door to vast riches and rewards for the ethnic elites of the winning candidate.

Defeat is not an option. And those were the circumstances in which Kenya almost went into civil war.

The best thing about the mediation effort that ended the fighting was that it went beyond the power-sharing deal that brought the parties into a coalition.

A combination of wisdom by the mediators and pragmatism by the political players as well as non-state actors including civil society and the media ushered in a rare period of consensus on the need for reforms between 2008 and 2010.

The outcome was the 2010 Constitution. It is not perfect. In particular, there are concerns about too many layers of bureaucracy which are costly. Reforming this will take political courage.

REAL VICTORY

But devolution was the real victory from the 2010 Constitution. It helped to tackle the problem of excessive concentration of power in the presidency.

Counties have brought decision-making authority closer to the grassroots. If the governor is too corrupt and pompous, voters have the power to vote them out.

By contrast, there is nothing that could be done about the district commissioners and provincial commissioners of old.

The people of Wajir and Tana River can make decisions about local priorities instead of these being centrally directed by civil servants and politicians in Nairobi who have never set foot in those regions.

It is true devolution is not a very efficient way to run a country. But dispersal of powers in a situation where politics is as ethnicised as it is in Kenya makes plenty of sense.

It was a price made necessary by years of unaccountable and exclusivist leadership.

ETHNIC EXCLUSION

Eventually, the number of counties will need to be reduced. They are certainly too many for a population of 45 million.

In multi-ethnic counties, there will be need for locals to craft a formula that does not transfer the problem of ethnic exclusion from the capital to the villages.

These are all necessary tweaks that will improve the system. However, the critics that focus too much on problems such as corruption should appreciate the history that made it necessary to adopt the experiment with devolution.

It has worked. That is why there is such heated competition for the position of governor.

And when in future the Kenyattas and Odingas won’t be on the ballot, national politics will be less heated because whether your favourite candidate for the presidency wins or not, at least you can pick your governor, whose decisions probably matter more than those of the president.

There are a lot of things to moan about in Kenya. Devolution and the substantial reforms in the post-2007 era, though, should be celebrated. Kenya has set an example for other post-conflict countries around the world.
   
[email protected] Twitter: @mutigam