Kenya likely to borrow governance structure from Mercedes Benz makers

Reacting to last Sunday’s piece, where I alluded to ANC leader Musalia Mudavadi’s caution that Kenyans shouldn’t be shepherded into adopting a governance structure that leaves us with two bulls tearing each other in the kraal, aka the 2008 post-election Grand Coalition government, a close aide of opposition leader Raila Odinga who didn’t want to be mentioned by name telephoned to say: “Musalia can’t differentiate between tomato and potato. The 2008 coalition government was a forced marriage on hostile bedfellows. The BBI is negotiated cohabitation by willing suitors!” Yawa, kizungu ngumu!

Though he didn’t use Shariff Nassir’s phrase, wapende, wasipende (whether they like it or not), the caller didn’t mince words that there will be a referendum in the country before the of the year, and said the envisaged governance structure will be a fait accompli.

REFERENDUM

It is instructive that in 2005, the same Raila aide told me the ‘Banana’ side would lose to the ‘Orange’, which came to pass, and again in the 2010 referendum he told me the ‘Yes’ side would carry the day by over 60 per cent of the vote, which happened. So, I am not taking any bets with him this time round.

*****

Then early in the week, I got a sniff of what transpired at a night-long meeting held on Monday at the Panafric Hotel by the group called the Mount Kenya Forum or the Mount Kenya Caucus, and which has the unreserved blessings of President Uhuru Kenyatta.

Actually, the man taking notes at the meeting was no less than the Interior PS, Dr Karanja Kibicho.

The meeting endorsed the expanded executive structure of government, and resolved to mobilise support for it at a referendum to be held later in the year.

Now, I have been in this business long enough to know that whenever the government and the leading opposition close ranks on an issue, then there is “no stopping the reggae”! to borrow from Raila-speak.

******

And as this was happening, the German visitor happened to be in town.

I am not privy to details of the notes the German president compared with his host during their closed-door meeting at State House.

But in the press conference they held, I was happy to hear the German visitor say his country will help us fight the locust menace.

That should spare us the headache of taking pictures of “sleeping locusts” and sending them to the government as advised by the sacked Agriculture CS Mwangi Kiunjuri, or taking hoping that the invading swarms “will soon die”, as Kiunjuri’s successor, Mr Peter Munya, put it!

*****

But I can bet in the closed-door meeting between the two Heads of State, it isn’t just locusts that were on the agenda.

If they touched on politics – and most likely they did – they mentioned the similarities in orientation and attitudes of the Kenyan and German society, and probably how the power structure prevailing in Germany can help cure the problems we have in Kenya after every election cycle since the return of the multi-party system in the 1990s.

GERMAN MODEL

Like independent Kenya, modern Germany was founded as one nation just in name, but with people pulling in different, even hostile, directions.

After German dictator Adolf Hitler was vanquished by the Allied Forces in the Second World War, the victors carved the country into two, East and West Germany.

The eastern side hewed to communism and was named the German Democratic Republic (GDR), while the western side went capitalist in what became the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG).

Externally induced hostilities between the two Germanys reached a dramatic climax in the early 1960s when a physical wall, the Berlin Wall, was built to separate them.

But even inside the separate Germanys, there existed strong regional identities based on tradition, culture and economy. The FRG was first to take deliberate steps to create a government structure that deflects away would-be intra-hostilities among the regions.

CONSITITUTION

In 1949, FDR enacted a constitution that ensures each of the 11 states (they call them Landers, the equivalent of our counties) that made the federal republic have a say on who held executive power in the country. They came up with a system called dual-executive, where power is shared between the president and the prime minister (in their case the ‘chancellor’).

With the collapse of communism in the late 1980s and the reunification of Germany, five more states from the eastern side joined the original 11 to give modern Germany 16 states.

The German president is elected by a majority vote in the national parliament (Bundestag), and a majority in the state assemblies on the basis of proportional representation.

The German president is the head of state – the face of the country in the international arena – and the commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

He/she signs international treaties, accredits and receives envoys, and appoints and commissions officers of the Armed Forces.

He/she can veto laws passed by parliament if considered unconstitutional, appoints and fires federal judges, and exercises power of pardon.

HEAD OF GOVERNMENT

But the German prime minister (the chancellor) is the substantive head of government. He/she supervises the day-to-day running of the government, and is in charge of policy formulation and direction.

The German prime minister is elected by the party, or the coalition, with the majority in national parliament, but formally appointed by the president.

However, he/she doesn’t serve at the mercy of the president and the latter cannot fire him/her without the approval of parliament.

The German chancellor proposes the deputy chancellor and cabinet ministers, who are formally appointed by the president. But neither the president nor the chancellor can fire a cabinet minister on a whim.

Actually, members of the cabinet go about their duties independently, but within wider borders of collective responsibility.

Another significant aspect of the German system that defuses regional tensions is that, since no single region can produce a majority in the national parliament and the state assemblies, sharing of power is guaranteed.

Also important is that coalition-building in Germany isn’t just about sharing seat, but more about shared manifestoes and programmes, with each region canvassing for its unique needs.

FRENCH BEST

Suffice it to say here that the dual executive model touted by the BBI proponents is more French than German. After all, much as we fancy Mercedes Benz, we are still hooked on French fries (though the potatoes are from Nyandarua!)

In France, the president is elected by universal suffrage (popular vote), and can only serve for a maximum of two five-year terms. He is the head of state but not head of government.

The French head of government is the prime minister, elected by parliament – that is, by the party or coalition with the majority in parliament, and formally appointed by the president.

Except in electing the president, the rest of the French system pretty much takes the German model – in terms of dual executive, separation of powers and coalition-building.

But creating an expanded executive structure for Kenya will be the easier part. Heads will be scratched and adrenaline levels raised when it comes to putting faces to the five offices to created - the president, deputy president, executive prime minister and two executive deputy prime ministers.

Question Number One is: What will be the criteria for distributing the ‘Big 5’ seats? It is said politics is local. But, truth be told, politics in Kenya isn’t just local. It is ethnic.

LIVER-JUGGLING

The results of last year’s population census released last week indicated five of the Kenyan communities make up 65 per cent of the population, with the other 40 communities comprising 35 per cent. Here we are talking of the Kikuyu, Luhya, Kalenjin, Luo and Kamba, in that order.

Whatever politicians say in their rallies, the bottom-line is that they will share the top five seats on the basis of tribal math.

Question Number Two: Does it mean the top leadership in the country will forever be confined to the Big Five, assuming population trends remain the same?

Question Number Three: Who within each of the Big Five will take the seat at the high table? For instance, at the Mount Kenya Forum meeting on Monday night, the big question, but which nobody wanted to tackle, is which name from the region will feature in the Big Five?

To paper it over, it was resolved there is no vacuum in the region for now and the undisputed kingpin is President Uhuru Kenyatta.

But with the latter on the verge of retirement, you can be sure unreported night meetings are taking place to plot on his replacement.

By the way, those doing so may want to have a word with Francis Atwoli, who has repeatedly told us “Uhuru Kenyatta is still a young man and going nowhere”.

GENDER

Question Number Four: What is the place of gender in sharing the top five seats? The women lobby in the country is demanding that the two-thirds rule must apply.

Then last, but most important of all the questions should be: What is in it for us the citizens of Kenya, the voters, as the tribal “chiefs” – or is it “the warlords”? – cut the cake among themselves?

In the next couple of months, Kenya will be a nation in a conversation with itself, and engaged in what the late Cabinet minister, John Michuki, famously called liver-juggling.

Reader response: In reference to the article in this column on February 16 (‘Curtain falls on mercenary with Kenyan clients’), the one and only Miguna Miguna tweeted: “Kamau Ngotho, the Deep State operative, reveals how CONMAN Raila Odinga was used by Dictator Moi to FIX Charles Njonjo by MANUFACTURING fiction about Njonjo’s involvement in the 1982 coup. The same thing Raila is doing for Uhuru.”

Of course, the stinker wasn’t aimed at me. But in labelling me a “Deep State operative” I will say to Miguna: “On that one, I am not boarding! I am not boarding!”

[email protected]