Self interests have ruined institutions

Former President Daniel arap Moi had an interesting way of governing Kenya.

His personal rule was quite evident everywhere. His portrait hanged firm even in people’s homes.

All men aspiring anything government had to pin his picture or that of a cockerel on the lapel of their coats.

The political life was so personalised that everything revolved around him.

There were humorous individuals and moments in his regime too.

These moments of humour, perhaps more than anything else, brought down quite a number of institutions.

Around the President was a courtier of trusted old men.

Many of them were quite illiterate but enterprising and humorous.

Their perceptions about political life informed the making of key political decisions.

What they said would be acted upon with speed without stepping on breaks.

But it also appeared as if they had been charged with the responsibility of making the President happy through the jokes they made.

And they often made jokes about everything.

If any of the party leaders or a Cabinet minister was sacked, they would make jokes about how the man would cry loudly asking for forgiveness.

PLEASING THE PRESIDENT
President Moi also had the best approach to creating loyalty among individuals.

He would sack someone. He would then reinstate the person after a few years.

Once recycled, the person remained loyal and supportive of the President throughout.

Once recycled, they pursued the government’s agenda with strict adherence to the dictates of one person – the President, who was also the government.

They did not care about the institutions they managed but the person who first sacked them and then reinstated them. This ended the life of many institutions.

These men in the court were not sophisticated in their views about Kenya.

They had only one interest — to ensure the President and his government remained undisturbed, and that the President governed for life.

They saw themselves as part of this vision — life members of the court of the President.

They started weaving decisions around this perception of “life presidency” and themselves as life members.

This caused the government to act as they wished.

Government officials would be called to listen and advise but the word of the members of the court would count in the end.

At one time they were troubled a lot by one issue most: the reports by the Controller and Auditor General.

Year after year, the Controller and Auditor General’s reports documented the waste in government ministries and parastatals.

They painted a picture of institutions where men ate everything they saw in government offices.

Parastatals were being looted by men who behaved as if they were practising a scorched earth policy in a time of war.

MORE STRATEGIES
Irked by persistent documentation of failures, the members of the court designed a clever strategy.

They simply asked: “supposing we remove the security of tenure of the person writing the report, will the person not be too worried about their survival to concern themselves with these audits?

In such situations, men of the court used to think alike: they said: “Yes indeed”.

The government removed the security of tenure to make the institution weak.

From then on, the reports took long to complete and publish. Mission completed they turned to others.

They were keen to staff Parliament with their loyal MPs.

They did not trust the secret ballot. In their wisdom, they said people liked the President and the government and, therefore, an open way of voting would show them who the enemies of the government were.

The President was certainly excited about this.

The party accepted the queue voting or what passed as mlolongo.

Here voters were required to stand behind their candidates or their agents.

The electoral officials would begin counting, first, the members on the line of the “government’s preferred” candidates.

Once complete, the chief or the police would begin beating people to prevent counting.

If upset by the outcome of the count, you could not appeal because it was difficult to bring people back to the queue.

TAINTED JUDICIARY
With this form of self interest, Kenya lost a generation of electoral history.

We had to go back to the drawing board to craft new electoral reforms to support future elections.

This self interest again ruined the Judiciary.

A few judges decided to stick their heads out by giving independent decisions on a number of cases.

Upset by the manner in which these judges were acting, the men of the court advised for the removal of security of tenure of judges.

They also insisted on the President appointing members of the bench and constituting Judicial Service Commission on his own terms.

With a stroke of a pen, the history of the Judiciary was ruined.

In the 1990s, the courtier of men continued to inform the making of decisions that favoured their own interests and the desire to have President Moi govern for life.

But they did not have the latitude to do many things as they did in the past.

They faced hostility from a group of professionals who had got their teeth from the reintroduction of multiparty politics.

Civil society groups were also making them sleepless because of the noise they made and how they exposed the government and the general brainless men around the President.

Aware that the country needed to move forward, these groups campaigned hard to prevent the return of KANU to power in 2002.

They strongly supported the National Rainbow Coalition (NARC) and won the election.

A NEW ERA
President Mwai Kibaki legitimised himself by recognising the need to reverse all that went wrong.

He allowed institutions to flourish. He allowed the rule of law to govern.

But President Kibaki had his own courtier of men (and this time some women) who behaved like President Moi’s men.

Their self interest ruined what was to be Africa’s best moment in history; Kenya was poised to be the best if the optimistic nature by which Kenyans received the new regime was anything to go by.

With the elections of December 2002, Kenyans addressed the challenge of ethnicity and created a one united nation.

They addressed the challenge of corruption and decided to fight corruption on their own – by arresting even the police on the road whom they caught receiving bribes from public transport vehicles.

The courtier of a few who preferred to advance their interests again spoilt this moment.

Of course there is no way the President would just have allowed this to happen without his own footprints.

We usually say that the political knowledge of any person is the product of the political and social environment on which the person is located.

The knowledge President Kibaki and of his regime therefore was the product of this narrow environment in which he was operating.

We are again witnessing events similar to those of the past with regard to institutions of governance.

The media is reporting how some offices are likely to be cannibalised.

There are reports that the Electoral Commission’s tenure of office will be extended to enable the commissioners’ transition the electoral processes.

DETRIMENTAL ACTIONS

There are reports that the Judiciary is again targeted for erosion.

Those pursuing these interests may have to look not far back to see how badly our institutions were shaken and destroyed when political interference was introduced as a management tool.

A few individuals are keen to benefit from some of these institutions and, therefore, are keen to advise in a manner that suits their interests.

This usually results in the public having low confidence in these institutions.

They see the institutions as being manipulated to serve the interests of the government.

With limited trust in these institutions, people cannot trust the with the delivery of credible results.

They will not trust them to deliver justice. Neither will they trust them to resolve conflicts in the society.

This is not to say there are no challenges.

It is of course wrong to go to an election with a completely new Electoral Commission.

But some members can be compelled to voluntarily retire one year before the election and be compensated as new ones are recruited.

The Judicial Service Commission need not present all three names.

They can present a name and a reason is given for declining to take it up.

They can follow with another. One can challenge the governance of other institutions using the laid out procedures in law and practice.

One lesson we have learnt from the past is that we should leave these institutions alone.

Kenyans wanted them this way. And that is how the Constitution envisaged them.

Prof Karuti Kanyinga is based at the Institute for Development Studies (IDS), University of Nairobi; [email protected]