Why chaotic party primaries speak of deeper political rot

Nairobi woman representative Rachel Shebesh expresses her dissatisfaction with Jubilee Party election officials during the tallying of votes in the Nairobi woman rep nomination at Nyayo Stadium on April 27, 2017. The fact that Jubilee’s elections were often the most problematic raises questions about the party’s organisational capacity. PHOTO | EVANS HABIL | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • The defeat of key individuals suggests that the nominations were not simply pre-determined by party leaders.
  • The primaries reflect how institutional change has failed to change the country’s underlying political culture.

Party primaries for all of the major political parties have been marred by poor planning, irregularities, allegations of malpractice, and — in some instances — intimidation and violence.

These events have attracted much media attention with reports of insufficient ballot papers or boxes and subsequent delays and protests; claims that aspirants were locked out or supporters disenfranchised; and the declaration of multiple winners in some instances.

It also includes the disruption of the vote in strongholds of all the major parties — with some aspirants arrested for promoting violence; reports of supporters storming polling stations; and/or the destruction of ballot papers.

MISSING NAMES
For example, in Gichugu constituency in Kirinyaga County, the names of eight aspirants for a Jubilee Member of County Assembly (MCA) were omitted from the ballot.

In response, supporters accused party officials of trying to rig the election and burnt ballot papers in protest.

Similar events were seen in Trans Nzoia, where Ford Kenya did not send ballot papers for the gubernatorial election thereby handing Governor Patrick Khaemba a direct nomination.

This prompted supporters of Khaemba’s opponent to burn at least 600 ballot papers in protest.

Yet, it is important not to simply cast the process as chaotic.

LOSERS

Indeed, given the delays, confusions, and high levels of competition, it is perhaps surprising that the polls have not triggered more violence.

At the same time, the fact that Jubilee’s elections were often the most problematic raises questions about the party’s organisational capacity, but it also suggests that leaders did not simply use the structures of the state to organise its affairs — as ruling parties have been wont to do.

Just as importantly, the defeat of key individuals suggests that the nominations were not simply pre-determined by party leaders.

Certainly, a number of President Kenyatta’s allies were defeated, while several candidates said to be fronted by Deputy President William Ruto were sent home in the Rift Valley.

FAMILY DYNASTY
This reality of limited elite interference is perhaps most notable when it comes to the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM).

Indeed, while the party has long been criticised for its lack of internal democracy, several relatives and close allies of Raila Odinga were defeated.

This includes Odinga’s elder brother, Dr Oburu Oginga (who was trying to reclaim the ‘family’ seat in Bondo) and his cousin, Jakoyo Midiwo (who was defending his parliamentary seat in Gem).

Nevertheless, while such dynamics are important, the chaos witnessed still constitutes cause for concern.

First, because they will further fuel a sense of popular scepticism about the political arena, which feeds into ethnic voting and a lack of accountability.

CYCLE OF IMPUNITY

Second, in party strongholds, the importance of securing a particular party ticket means that many who resorted to malpractice and bribery will enter the county government, National Assembly or Senate.

A reality that only further exacerbates a reinforcing cycle of impunity and scepticism.

Third, parties are now embroiled in fierce disputes, which may often play on, and simultaneously exacerbate, other tensions and divisions.

This has implications for intra- and inter-communal cohesion, but also for party structures at the local level, which are key for safeguarding the credibility of the process through the role of party agents.

POLITICAL CULTURE
The problem, in brief, is that agents who feel that their favoured candidate was rigged out may not be so committed to protecting the vote in the general election, and may be easier to bribe or intimidate.

Finally, but not least, the primaries reflect how institutional change has failed to change the country’s underlying political culture.

In short, the 2010 constitution and associated legislation sought to encourage the emergence of parties that would provide a disciplinary structure for political action and thus change the nature of Kenyan politics.

The aim: to end the pattern of ‘big man’ clientelist politics and to usher in a new period of popular involvement in determining party policy.

RULE OF LAW
This simply has not happened, partly because — in the face of outright defiance by political leaders — key institutions (such as the IEBC, Registrar of Political Parties and the Judiciary) have drawn back from enforcing the laws at key moments.

As a result, while the party primaries could have been worse, the problems witnessed point more to a politics of continuity than of change.

Gabrielle Lynch is an Associate Professor of Comparative Politics, University of Warwick, UK. [email protected]; @GabrielleLynch6