Ruto’s bid to win Muslim vote insincere

The de facto leader of the ‘No’ camp, Mr William Ruto, has of late been attempting to convince Muslims to vote against the proposed constitution.

The majority of Muslims are perceived to support the proposed law, a factor which has been nagging those opposed to the document.

The latest strategy by the minister has been to create fear among Muslims that the draconian anti-terrorism law will be automatically enshrined in the new constitution once it comes into effect, the reason why the US has been strongly advocating for the proposed constitution.

Previously, Mr Ruto claimed that a ‘Yes’ vote would result in conflict between Muslims and Christians, a suggestion which Muslim leaders dismissed as parochial and mischievous.

It appears that Mr Ruto wants to capitalise on Muslim fears and turn himself into a champion for advocating their rights. However, his record does not support what he claims to be standing for.

The so-called war on terrorism and the attempts to have the anti-terrorism Bill enshrined into law was heavily criticised by Muslim leaders and civil rights groups.

In this campaign, Muslims were specifically targeted, scores were arrested and subjected to detention, harassment, torture and other forms of human rights violations. A vast majority of those arrested were found to be innocent.

In his arguments, Mr Ruto cited the clause which binds Kenya to international conventions as an easy ride for the Terrorism Bill. However, he failed to mention that all these conventions have to be ratified by Parliament.

At the same time, despite his influential political position, Mr Ruto has never once spoken out against these injustices which were heavily criticised by local and international human rights defenders. And now he wants to claim a piece of the cake for defending the rights of Muslims. This smacks of insincerity.

He has also sent out conflicting signals as to his stand on the kadhi courts. When addressing Muslims, he expresses support for the courts, but while in the company of the Christian clergy, he is unequivocal that the draft has elevated one religion above others.

The United States may have its reasons for supporting the proposed constitution but it certainly will make it much difficult for any attempt to have the anti-terrorism Bill enacted into law as its tenets are in total contravention of the proposed law.

The enhanced Bill of Rights has made it categorical that individual rights will take precedence over other rights. Scenes witnessed in the past where the anti-terrorism police unit would break into homes without a search warrant, carry out arbitrarily arrests and subject suspects to incommunicado detentions will no longer be possible.

Apart from the kadhi courts, there are many other important gains for Muslims in the new constitutional dispensation. For the first time, the constitution has specifically addressed the issue of marginalisation, which has, since independence, impacted negatively on the political, social and economic aspirations of Muslims.

Discrimination on the basis of religion, ethnicity and race has been outrightly outlawed, which will go a long way towards addressing the concerns of Muslims, especially the ban on Muslim girls wearing the hijab in schools, and the situation in which Muslim children are forced to learn Christian Religious Education instead of their own faith.

The strategies which Mr Ruto is now resorting to are a cheap way of seeking votes which is not acceptable to Muslims. While he has a right to argue his points, he shouldn’t try propaganda and misinformation to win the support of Muslims.