We have new constitutional moment

There is a narrative, a false one, that our ethnic groups could, and have killed one another on account of election outcomes.

Those threatening mass action and chaos under the guise of their legitimate right to demonstrate and picket, premise their expectations on this false logic.

The 2007/2008 near total collapse of law and order is often presented as evidence and example to justify the false narrative.

VIOLENCE

We did not descend into ethnic strife and chaos in 2008 because of the election results.

It was contrived. The elections were the excuse, the trigger to express a much deeper grievance!

We descended into chaos because there was a deliberate attempt to fulfil an outstanding vision and ambition of the Kalenjin community, long before being reduced into writing as the “Nandi Declaration” by their great son and former Kadu MP for Nandi North.

He was born Erick Kipketer Seroney, later changed it to Jean-Marie Seroney.

ELECTIONS

The thrust of the declaration was, “Kikuyus must leave the Rift Valley”. It didn’t happen, it will never happen.

I hope that Deputy President William Samoei Ruto, and the Kalenjin community who follow him, understand and accept this simple fact.

“If Uhuru Kenyatta is declared President of Kenya after another shambolic election, this country will burn!” (or words to that effect).

This was a tweet sometime back by my good friend, Dr David Ndii. Well David, it happened.

Uhuru Kenyatta was declared President, the elections were allegedly “shambolic” but the country has not yet burned, and need not burn.

TRIBAL POLITICS

I would agree with your predictions, but only if you crystallise the much deeper grievance needed to “burn” this country.

Election results are not enough! I would suggest that the obvious and growing antipathy against the Kikuyu/Kalenjin power grab (even with, but especially without, legitimate and legal elections), will slowly but surely become the deeper grievance that will take us over the cliff unless we do something about it now.

This article was inspired by a discussion on TV, for the first time since the nullification of the August presidential election, the panel did not include any lawyer or politician.

UNITY

What a difference that makes!

What I took away from it was that although we have expressly acknowledged our diversity in our Constitution, in the way we think, in the way we vote, and we are no longer ashamed to assert our ethnic identity in a public debate, we have not yet openly and honestly discussed the following question:

“Since we are so different, do we still want to live together as one sovereign state? If so, WHY and, even more critically, HOW?”

In other words, we have not sufficiently discussed the philosophical foundations of our nation state.

CONSTITUTION

We know who we are, and as the TV panel pointed out, we have no constitutional crisis yet, and fresh presidential election must be held on October 26.

But we have another constitutional moment to reflect on these questions:

1. Since we are so different, do we still want to live together as one sovereign state? My answer is YES!

2. WHY? My answer is NOT because we are all “Kenyans” (what does that even mean?) but because it makes ECONOMIC sense!

3. More critically, HOW? My answer is we must re-negotiate the Constitution! This is another constitutional moment.

MARGINALISED
I was a visible delegate at Bomas of Kenya and I must confess that it was our express intention that whoever vied for president and lost, should go home.

It is now obvious that that has not and will not work.

There must be many reasons, but the perception that the Luo, the Luhya, the Kamba, and so on, are excluded from government stems from the fact that their preferred ethnic leaders have lost in presidential elections.

We need to revise our Bomas intention and provide that the presidential candidate and the running mate of the losing political (read ethnic) formation shall become minority leaders in the Senate and National Assembly, respectively.

POWER SHARING

The said TV panel suggested that we should also provide for a fully functional, tax-funded 15-member “Shadow Cabinet” appointed by the opposition.

These are ideas open to debate, but it must be clearly understood that the framework of the discussions the clergy and business people are calling for between President Uhuru Kenyatta and opposition leader Raila Odinga is about the foregoing constitutional moment, NOT the “nusu mkate” (power-sharing) nonsense Jubilee diehards are spewing all over the country.

Mr Ngugi is a consultant in public affairs and policy. [email protected]