Dialogue must be about electoral justice, nothing else

President Uhuru Kenyatta addresses the press at Mutomo Primary School in Gatundu South after casting his vote on October 26, 2017 . The President hinted at a possibility of having a dialogue with Nasa leader Raila Odinga. However, such dialogue should be about electoral justice and nothing else. PHOTO | MARTIN MUKANGU | NATION MEDIA GROUP

What you need to know:

  • Having trifled with the opposition in its inexorable march to a second term, Jubilee will soon announce that the opposition was always an important partner, despite the roughhouse tactics it has frequently extended to the opposition and its supporters and that people must talk.

  • Unfortunately, Kenya has been here before, when the dominant actor reaches down to talk to the underdog, having already done its worst

  • On all previous occasions, the dialogue has been a manipulation, aimed at co-optation, rather than resolving grievances.

By the time the country held fresh elections on Thursday, the meaning of the election had changed.

The original purpose for the fresh election was to give effect to a judgment of the Supreme Court, which annulled the presidential election held on August 8, and ordered that a fresh election be held within the 60 days provided for in the Constitution.

The court also ordered that the fresh election must be held strictly in accordance with the Constitution and the applicable law.

In the ensuing period, a major disagreement arose between the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission and Nasa over the reforms necessary for ensuring that the fresh election was credible.

CREATE CRISIS

The inability to bridge their differences led to the withdrawal of Raila Odinga, the Nasa candidate, from the race for the fresh election.

It would seem that Odinga had expected that his withdraw from the election would create a crisis big enough to force a negotiation with the IEBC and the Jubilee Government, over his grievances.

To increase the leverage of their coalition, Nasa announced a countrywide campaign of protests against the IEBC, similar to the one that culminated in the ouster of the previous members of the IEBC in 2016.

Police often reacted with brutal force to the Nasa protests, exacerbating the already raw situation created by post-election violence that had been experienced in a number of Nasa strongholds.  

IEBC

Amid a deepening political crisis, Jubilee forced through both Houses of Parliament a number of legislative measures affecting the IEBC and the management of the electoral process, which it justified as necessary for ensuring compliance with the requirements imposed by the Supreme Court judgment that annulled the presidential election.

Thereafter, one of the IEBC commissioners, Roselyn Akombe, resigned her position and fled to the United States, announcing that this was a difficult decision she had considered for a long time, and which was necessary, as she no longer wished to be part of the preparations for the fresh election, which she termed a mockery.

Her media interviews from the United States have painted a picture of an IEBC that has completely been captured by political interests.

Ms Akombe’s previous complaints about threats to a member of her family, who eventually left the country fearing for his life, had largely been ignored.

Subsequently, the IEBC chair, Wafula Chebukati, threatened that he would also resign his position if he did not receive the support he deemed necessary to hold the fresh election.

ELECTION

Notwithstanding the internal problems at the IEBC, and the political crisis arising from the protests that Nasa was staging, preparations for the election went ahead.

President Uhuru Kenyatta characterised opposition calls for dialogue as a demand for power-sharing, something, he said, Jubilee was not prepared to consider.

The Nasa protests eventually matured into a campaign of sabotage against the fresh presidential election.

Against a clear determination by the government that the election must take place, the stage was set for an uncertain ending.

When Odinga withdrew from the election, it ceased to be a contest as Kenyatta’s victory was all but assured.

PURPOSE

In the circumstances, the purpose of the election changed from a competition for power between Kenyatta and Odinga and became a contest over whose resolve would prevail on whether or not there should be a fresh presidential election as scheduled.

To bolster his position, amid opposition threats that no election would take place in their strongholds, Kenyatta rolled out a massive security presence in these areas, further exacerbating the tensions that had been in place in these parts of Kenya, in the context of the crackdown on street protests.

Odinga’s withdrawal from the election, coupled with the internal problems at the IEBC that have been ignored, robbed the election of its legitimacy, turning into a rite that would lead to Kenyatta’s coronation for a second term.

Aware that the circumstances of the election would necessarily lead to a low turnout, Kenyatta invested in vigorous campaigning, which included a very strong drive to get his base out to vote.

In the end, however, this was not enough to reverse a visibly low turnout, although IEBC figures have purported that there was a large turnout.

LOW TURNOUT

Subject to any legal challenge that may seek to annul the fresh presidential election, the stage is now set for the declaration of Kenyatta as President for a second term.

However, Kenyatta’s victory is pyric.

Rather than participating in the election, large parts of the country were involved in running battles as police endeavoured to thwart marauding groups out to disrupt polling.

In many places, there were scenes of ordinary citizens deploying everything in their power — rocks, faeces, dead dogs, fires, welding gates shut — to ensure that no election took place in their neighbourhoods.

While some would regard these as acts of lawlessness, others view them as civic battles for ballot justice.

The low turnout, even in Jubilee strongholds, has bled the Jubilee government of its legitimacy, and with a restive population in large parts of the country, the election will not resolve the deep-seated grievances that have gathered around the country.

DIALOGUE

While Kenyatta had initially dismissed calls for dialogue, this was tactical, to ensure that he first secured a re-election before he could speak with the opposition.

With an election result, however obtained, he has got what he wanted and is likely to negotiate. The problem, though, is that roles have reversed.

Having trifled with the opposition in its inexorable march to a second term, Jubilee will soon announce that the opposition was always an important partner, despite the roughhouse tactics it has frequently extended to the opposition and its supporters and that people must talk.

Unfortunately, Kenya has been here before, when the dominant actor reaches down to talk to the underdog, having already done its worst.

On all previous occasions, the dialogue has been a manipulation, aimed at co-optation, rather than resolving grievances.

Whatever happens this time, any dialogue between Jubilee and Nasa must be about electoral justice.

Anything else will be a continuation of the circumstances that imperil the country every five years.