One of the challenges facing African governments - Kenya included - continues to be the incapacity of leaders to resist the temptation of dishing out favours to relatives and friends. All across the continent, leaders have given away public resources, in many cases, to undeserving and unqualified cronies to the great disadvantage of more creditable and suitable individuals. In the popular parlance this practice is called nepotism. Let me illustrate here some chronic cases of this rot in our continent:
In neighbouring Uganda, President Yoweri Museveni has appointed not only his wife as Minister in government, but has hired his daughter as his personal secretary at State House. His brother, General Caleb Akandwanaho, popularly known as Salim Saleh is his senior advisor on military affairs while his son, Lt. Col. Muhoozi Kainerugaba, is commander of special forces, an elite unit whose job is to guard the presidency. Museveni's family tree in government is long enough to start a whole new department.
In Zimbabwe, a large number of people from Robert Mugabe's extended Gushungo clan have benefited in many ways from public resources through Gushungo Investment Company, Gushungo Security Company and Gushungo Construction. Ministries and the diplomatic service are crowded with sons and daughters of senior government officials, some of them still attending universities in countries of their posting.
In Angola, President dos Santos' eldest daughter, Isabele, was named by Forbes as one of the richest African women. In an investigation published in the magazine recently, it was confirmed that she amassed her wealth through the help of her father. She holds extensive investments in mining, oil, diamond and cement manufacturing.
In Equatorial Guinea, the President's son, Teodoro, not too long time ago, owned eleven super-cars worth millions of dollars in France. These were later impounded by the French government as part of a foreign aid money laundering investigation. Teodoro, who is officially a Minister in his country, also owned a luxury mansion in the exotic Malibu area of California and a jet. He also counted as part of his possessions, the famous jewel-encrusted glove that Michael Jackson wore during his "Bad" tour valued at 275,000 US dollars. These too were confiscated reportedly by the US government.
It is obvious that all these people got to where they got, and became rich as a result of nepotism.
Although in Kenya favouritism does not appear to have reached the levels of the countries mentioned above, it has been part of our life since independence. In 1974, for example, President Jomo Kenyatta, in a gazette notice No. 3750, appointed twenty Permanent Secretaries. Out of them eleven came from one tribe. The notice was signed by G. K. Kariithi as Permanent Secretary and Secretary to the Cabinet. Interestingly, his own name also appeared on the same appointment notice. There were so many other examples of malpractices.
The situation did not get any better during President Moi's 24-year rule. Cronies, like the late Mulu Mutisya, landed important positions in the public sector without the education and qualification required for those positions. It is also common knowledge that politically-connected individuals were given huge tracks of land in the most fertile areas of the Rift Valley.
During President Mwai Kibaki's government, it was widely known that ministries and departments such as the treasury, the central bank and parastatals were manned by civil servants and officials who spoke one language.
With the new constitution we expect this trend, where a selected clique of people benefit from public resources, would not take root in Uhuru Kenyatta's administration. Given recent appointments, however, there is cause for alarm; that the Uhuru administration may be heading towards the same direction as the previous three regimes. It will be sad if that happens. Kenya has 42 tribes each one endowed with qualified and competent individuals capable of filling all key positions in government. Everyone must get a fair chance.
I know Uhuru and his deputy William Ruto want to leave a lasting legacy of good deeds - whether they rule for five years or for twenty years as has been predicted. To achieve this, they must fight off any pressure from kinsmen, and move away from past practices.
And that is my say.
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Sunday, September 22, 2013
WESTGATE: KENYA'S DARKEST WEEK
This week is one of the darkest in Kenya's history.
If there is any country in Eastern and Southern African that has suffered the most from international terrorism, and continues to be a key target of modern-day bandits, it is Kenya. We have shed innocent blood, suffered eonomic melt-down as a result of the many travel advisories issued by Western nations; and, consequently, we have been put on a permanent state of alert.
Before the American Embassy attack in 1998, 20 people were killed at the Norfolk Hotel bombing. Thirteen perished at the Paradise Hotel in Kikambala in 2002. Minor attacks have also taken place in local bars, a small shopping complex on Moi Avenue and several other points in northern Kenya where casualties were recorded. These attacks have taken place despite government measures to deal with terrorism.
I was saddened though that some Kenyans took to the social media to lash out at the government for what they said was a failure by authorities to prevent the attack. They did this at a time when ambulances were still shuttling people to hospitals and the thugs still holed up with our hostages at the Mall. I feel the hasty blame-game was premature and insensitive. I am happy, however, that most Kenyans have contined to support out security forces.
I am sure many wish the government could have done more to stop the attackers who, we now know, are members of the Al Shabaab. But no country, not even the most vigilant nation in the world, has been able to prevent attacks from modern-day terrorists. International bandits have become more adept at plotting more secretly, and are far more cordinated today than they were a few years ago.
The speed in which our security forces moved in to take charge of the situation was commendable. Also coming up for praise are the dozens of volunteers who worked hard to shepherd people out of danger zones, carried helpless children to safety and collaborated with the Kenya Red Cross to save lives. We must also thank those who continue to come out in their thousands all over the country to donate blood, and those who continue to offer food. This type of unity, devoid of political, racial or religious consideration has never been seen before in Kenya. It is a good start towards unifying our people in the wake of the many challenges facing our country.
But people expect the government will do much more in future in terms of securing our country. Going forward, the government must review its security manuals and re-train its forces. It must go for the terrorists where they are instead of waiting for them in Kenya. I agree with our leaders that the terror group must be pursued at all cost and punished appropriately. That effort must start immediately. We have too much work to do and cannot afford to be distracted by cowardly attacks by destructive forces.
However, the first line of defence is Kenyans themselves. Intelligence must start with us: in our own homes, in our work places and in entertainment joints. We must report suspicious activities to authorities without fear.
The weapons used at Westgate must have been transported into Kenya by public transport and stockpiled in our own localities. Someone must have noticed something. Our motto should be: report something when you notice something. The government cannot succeed in wiping out this menace without our help.
Finally, we have gone through similar difficulties before, and we rebounded. We are a resilient people, and we will overcome this one too. Our enemies must know that we will not be cowed by any such acts of violence.
And that is my say.
If there is any country in Eastern and Southern African that has suffered the most from international terrorism, and continues to be a key target of modern-day bandits, it is Kenya. We have shed innocent blood, suffered eonomic melt-down as a result of the many travel advisories issued by Western nations; and, consequently, we have been put on a permanent state of alert.
Before the American Embassy attack in 1998, 20 people were killed at the Norfolk Hotel bombing. Thirteen perished at the Paradise Hotel in Kikambala in 2002. Minor attacks have also taken place in local bars, a small shopping complex on Moi Avenue and several other points in northern Kenya where casualties were recorded. These attacks have taken place despite government measures to deal with terrorism.
I was saddened though that some Kenyans took to the social media to lash out at the government for what they said was a failure by authorities to prevent the attack. They did this at a time when ambulances were still shuttling people to hospitals and the thugs still holed up with our hostages at the Mall. I feel the hasty blame-game was premature and insensitive. I am happy, however, that most Kenyans have contined to support out security forces.
I am sure many wish the government could have done more to stop the attackers who, we now know, are members of the Al Shabaab. But no country, not even the most vigilant nation in the world, has been able to prevent attacks from modern-day terrorists. International bandits have become more adept at plotting more secretly, and are far more cordinated today than they were a few years ago.
The speed in which our security forces moved in to take charge of the situation was commendable. Also coming up for praise are the dozens of volunteers who worked hard to shepherd people out of danger zones, carried helpless children to safety and collaborated with the Kenya Red Cross to save lives. We must also thank those who continue to come out in their thousands all over the country to donate blood, and those who continue to offer food. This type of unity, devoid of political, racial or religious consideration has never been seen before in Kenya. It is a good start towards unifying our people in the wake of the many challenges facing our country.
But people expect the government will do much more in future in terms of securing our country. Going forward, the government must review its security manuals and re-train its forces. It must go for the terrorists where they are instead of waiting for them in Kenya. I agree with our leaders that the terror group must be pursued at all cost and punished appropriately. That effort must start immediately. We have too much work to do and cannot afford to be distracted by cowardly attacks by destructive forces.
However, the first line of defence is Kenyans themselves. Intelligence must start with us: in our own homes, in our work places and in entertainment joints. We must report suspicious activities to authorities without fear.
The weapons used at Westgate must have been transported into Kenya by public transport and stockpiled in our own localities. Someone must have noticed something. Our motto should be: report something when you notice something. The government cannot succeed in wiping out this menace without our help.
Finally, we have gone through similar difficulties before, and we rebounded. We are a resilient people, and we will overcome this one too. Our enemies must know that we will not be cowed by any such acts of violence.
And that is my say.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
ICC: THOSE WORKING TO SUBVERT JUSTICE MUST BE PROSECUTED
From what we saw at the International Criminal Court at the Hague this past week, it's quite clear Fatou Bensouda has a herculean task ahead of her in prosecuting the Kenyans accused of crimes against humanity. The Deputy President, William Ruto is accused of orchestrating the 2007 post-election violence while his co-accused, former radio broadcaster, Joshua Sang, has to answer allegations that he used broadcasts to fan violence against certain tribes in the Rift Valley.
While the defence led by Karim Khan for Ruto and Katwa Kigen for Sang came out smelling like roses on the first day of the trial on September 10, the prosecution team was left splashed with rotten eggs all over its face after it forced the adjournment of the case prematurely for lack of witnesses. Even the Bench, president over by Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji, appeared disappointed by the unpreparedness of the prosecution.
The case which was filed by the former ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo before he retired in 2012, has had a very bumpy ride since the charges were confirmed in 2011. From the original six who were initially indicted, it is only the two now appearing in court, and Kenya's President Uhuru Kenyatta whose trial begins in a few weeks, who remain to face charges. The pre-trial release of former head of civil service, Francis Muthaura and former minister Henry Kosgei for lack of evidence signalled the beginning of troubles for the prosecution. Then followed the pull-out of at least two judges; numerous unexplained postponements; legal arguments over witness testimonies; and finally allegations of witness tampering.
For the moment, Bensouda needs to concentrate on how she can turn the shortcomings of last week into an opportunity this week to make a formidable case before the court. She must be able to pick herself up and make an impression by presenting a strong case through the first set of witnesses. The first testimonies must have the capacity to disorient the defence and get the attention of the judges. If she fails to do that, the cases may be as dead as a dodo.
Already both defence lawyers have called for the acquittal of their clients claiming the cases lacked merit. With at least a half a point ahead of the prosecution, the defence is coming into court this week more invigorated, more confident and ready to charge at the prosecution.
While some witnesses reportedly arrived at the Hague these past few days ready for the start of proceedings on Tuesday, other reports said more witnesses had withdrawn from the case. And that brings me to my next point. It is emerging now that more people may have been involved in matters surrounding the Hague cases than originally thought. Names and faces are now cropping up in the public domain to suggest that the whole saga of witnesses could have been exploited by certain non-governmental organisations and individuals. That the ICC cases were heavily infiltrated by human rights activists and political opportunists is not a secret.
The matter becomes even more intriguing when I hear some of those NGOs may have had more than local connections. If this is true, then those elements who covertly interfered with the witnesses must face the full force of the law. Similarly, if there is anyone who gave false information - either for or against the accused persons - to the ICC investigators must be investigated and if found culpable, prosecuted.
The charges facing Uhuru, Ruto and Sang are extremely serious and could, if confirmed, lead to long prison sentences. We already know about the 50-year jail term given to the former Liberian President Charles Taylor. We also know about the conviction, not too long ago, of Thomas Lubanga, leader of the Union of Congolese Patriots, who was sentenced to 14 years by the ICC court for a myriad charges connected to atrocities in his home country, the DRC. Consequently, any kind of interference in an attempt to subvert justice must not be tolerated.
This case is about the thousands of people who were murdered, raped, tortured and rendered homeless as a result of the heinous events of 2007. These people are crying for justice: justice of not only getting their farms back - or be compensated as the case may be - but justice that would ensure those who committed acts of violence are punished according to the law; and that never again will Kenya be subjected to such despicable acts of civil chaos.
And that is my say.
While the defence led by Karim Khan for Ruto and Katwa Kigen for Sang came out smelling like roses on the first day of the trial on September 10, the prosecution team was left splashed with rotten eggs all over its face after it forced the adjournment of the case prematurely for lack of witnesses. Even the Bench, president over by Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji, appeared disappointed by the unpreparedness of the prosecution.
The case which was filed by the former ICC prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo before he retired in 2012, has had a very bumpy ride since the charges were confirmed in 2011. From the original six who were initially indicted, it is only the two now appearing in court, and Kenya's President Uhuru Kenyatta whose trial begins in a few weeks, who remain to face charges. The pre-trial release of former head of civil service, Francis Muthaura and former minister Henry Kosgei for lack of evidence signalled the beginning of troubles for the prosecution. Then followed the pull-out of at least two judges; numerous unexplained postponements; legal arguments over witness testimonies; and finally allegations of witness tampering.
For the moment, Bensouda needs to concentrate on how she can turn the shortcomings of last week into an opportunity this week to make a formidable case before the court. She must be able to pick herself up and make an impression by presenting a strong case through the first set of witnesses. The first testimonies must have the capacity to disorient the defence and get the attention of the judges. If she fails to do that, the cases may be as dead as a dodo.
Already both defence lawyers have called for the acquittal of their clients claiming the cases lacked merit. With at least a half a point ahead of the prosecution, the defence is coming into court this week more invigorated, more confident and ready to charge at the prosecution.
While some witnesses reportedly arrived at the Hague these past few days ready for the start of proceedings on Tuesday, other reports said more witnesses had withdrawn from the case. And that brings me to my next point. It is emerging now that more people may have been involved in matters surrounding the Hague cases than originally thought. Names and faces are now cropping up in the public domain to suggest that the whole saga of witnesses could have been exploited by certain non-governmental organisations and individuals. That the ICC cases were heavily infiltrated by human rights activists and political opportunists is not a secret.
The matter becomes even more intriguing when I hear some of those NGOs may have had more than local connections. If this is true, then those elements who covertly interfered with the witnesses must face the full force of the law. Similarly, if there is anyone who gave false information - either for or against the accused persons - to the ICC investigators must be investigated and if found culpable, prosecuted.
The charges facing Uhuru, Ruto and Sang are extremely serious and could, if confirmed, lead to long prison sentences. We already know about the 50-year jail term given to the former Liberian President Charles Taylor. We also know about the conviction, not too long ago, of Thomas Lubanga, leader of the Union of Congolese Patriots, who was sentenced to 14 years by the ICC court for a myriad charges connected to atrocities in his home country, the DRC. Consequently, any kind of interference in an attempt to subvert justice must not be tolerated.
This case is about the thousands of people who were murdered, raped, tortured and rendered homeless as a result of the heinous events of 2007. These people are crying for justice: justice of not only getting their farms back - or be compensated as the case may be - but justice that would ensure those who committed acts of violence are punished according to the law; and that never again will Kenya be subjected to such despicable acts of civil chaos.
And that is my say.
Sunday, August 25, 2013
VIP PENSION PROPOSAL RIDICULOUS
In 2010, Jerry Rawlings's residence in Accra was destroyed by fire leaving the former president of Ghana homeless. Because he did not have another house in the city, he moved to his village, while his wife Nana Konadu, hunkered down with her mother in the capital. Desperate and dependent only on his meager military pension, Rawlings made a public appeal to the government for a place to stay. It took almost a year before he was allocated a house.
We do not want to see our leaders in Kenya live like tramps, or, be subjected to humiliation like what Rawlings went through once they leave office, but the pension figures suggested by some MPs to reward our former leaders are ridiculous. A proposal being readied for debate in Parliament wants the exchequer to pay 485 million shillings every year to our ex-leaders as pension. The ex-prime minister and former vice president will, for example, get 87 million shillings each year, equivalent to one million US dollars. The amount does not include additional perks such as vehicles and security.
Kenya is a poor country with a gross domestic product (GDP) of only 37 billion US dollars.The United States, the richest country in the world with a GDP of 15,700 billion US dollars, pays its former presidents only 190,000 dollars per year. Britain, whose GDP is sixty times that of Kenya at 2,440 US dollars, pays its former prime ministers a mere 125,000 US dollars per year. Now, isn't it surprising that a country that perennially begs for money and food from the US and Britain should be the one to spend taxpayers' money so lavishly?
I want to submit that our leaders are not poor. They are very wealthy even by international standards. Both Raila and Kalonzo have luxurious villas in Nairobi and in their rural villages. Both have incomes coming in from businesses and farms,. They are not like the majority of Kenyans who survive on a hands-to-mouth circle of poverty. It is most unlikely our leaders would ever be homeless.
That is the reason why I say they do not deserve - and should not be paid - the millions being proposed by a fanatical member of ODM. And this should apply to all our leaders, past and present.
Already presidents Moi and Kibaki are enjoying perks that will make many countries quiver in astonishment. Recently, someone even suggested that we spend a cool 50 million shillings to build a monument for Kibaki and another 700 million for an office complex. A government corporation in the energy sector offered to build a petrol station for Kibaki as a going away present, while another wanted to give him four fish ponds. I don't want to believe we Kenyans are nuts, but when carried by euphoria of the day, we seem to go bananas.
Members of parliament who support the proposal for exorbitant rewards for our leaders must look at their own constituencies first. Do they have decent schools? Do pupils have enough desks and books? How about their hospitals and dispensaries: are they adequate and do they have qualified personnel to man them? How about the conditions of their roads? Do they have piped water and electricity supplies? I dont even want to talk about libraries and recreational centres that are so important for our young people.
I do not want to under-estimate the sacrifices our leaders have made to our country. They served with commitment and dedication but they did not work for free. They were collecting fat salaries every month, enjoyed free security, free transport and free junkets. If there is anything we can do, it is to give them a one-time - not yearly disbursements - token payment, and that token should be based on the ability of the country to pay.
With domestic and foreign debts running into trillions of shillings, with a wage bill now almost 13 percent of the GDP, with teachers, doctors, nurses and other public workers clamouring for salary increases, and with 40 million people to feed, treat and and educate, we cannot afford this kind of wastefulness.
When in 2009, legislators in Ghana proposed a 650,000 US dollars gratuity for Rawlings, two mansions, six chauffeur-driven cars and a 65-day overseas vacation, he turned the package down and told the MPs to "get lost." His view was that such huge payments would impoverish the country.
That is why I salute deputy president William Ruto for coming out openly to reject the proposed pension scheme. I want other leaders to come out and take a similar stand. At the same time, I urge parliament to reject the proposed bill in its present form.
And that is my say.
We do not want to see our leaders in Kenya live like tramps, or, be subjected to humiliation like what Rawlings went through once they leave office, but the pension figures suggested by some MPs to reward our former leaders are ridiculous. A proposal being readied for debate in Parliament wants the exchequer to pay 485 million shillings every year to our ex-leaders as pension. The ex-prime minister and former vice president will, for example, get 87 million shillings each year, equivalent to one million US dollars. The amount does not include additional perks such as vehicles and security.
Kenya is a poor country with a gross domestic product (GDP) of only 37 billion US dollars.The United States, the richest country in the world with a GDP of 15,700 billion US dollars, pays its former presidents only 190,000 dollars per year. Britain, whose GDP is sixty times that of Kenya at 2,440 US dollars, pays its former prime ministers a mere 125,000 US dollars per year. Now, isn't it surprising that a country that perennially begs for money and food from the US and Britain should be the one to spend taxpayers' money so lavishly?
I want to submit that our leaders are not poor. They are very wealthy even by international standards. Both Raila and Kalonzo have luxurious villas in Nairobi and in their rural villages. Both have incomes coming in from businesses and farms,. They are not like the majority of Kenyans who survive on a hands-to-mouth circle of poverty. It is most unlikely our leaders would ever be homeless.
That is the reason why I say they do not deserve - and should not be paid - the millions being proposed by a fanatical member of ODM. And this should apply to all our leaders, past and present.
Already presidents Moi and Kibaki are enjoying perks that will make many countries quiver in astonishment. Recently, someone even suggested that we spend a cool 50 million shillings to build a monument for Kibaki and another 700 million for an office complex. A government corporation in the energy sector offered to build a petrol station for Kibaki as a going away present, while another wanted to give him four fish ponds. I don't want to believe we Kenyans are nuts, but when carried by euphoria of the day, we seem to go bananas.
Members of parliament who support the proposal for exorbitant rewards for our leaders must look at their own constituencies first. Do they have decent schools? Do pupils have enough desks and books? How about their hospitals and dispensaries: are they adequate and do they have qualified personnel to man them? How about the conditions of their roads? Do they have piped water and electricity supplies? I dont even want to talk about libraries and recreational centres that are so important for our young people.
I do not want to under-estimate the sacrifices our leaders have made to our country. They served with commitment and dedication but they did not work for free. They were collecting fat salaries every month, enjoyed free security, free transport and free junkets. If there is anything we can do, it is to give them a one-time - not yearly disbursements - token payment, and that token should be based on the ability of the country to pay.
With domestic and foreign debts running into trillions of shillings, with a wage bill now almost 13 percent of the GDP, with teachers, doctors, nurses and other public workers clamouring for salary increases, and with 40 million people to feed, treat and and educate, we cannot afford this kind of wastefulness.
When in 2009, legislators in Ghana proposed a 650,000 US dollars gratuity for Rawlings, two mansions, six chauffeur-driven cars and a 65-day overseas vacation, he turned the package down and told the MPs to "get lost." His view was that such huge payments would impoverish the country.
That is why I salute deputy president William Ruto for coming out openly to reject the proposed pension scheme. I want other leaders to come out and take a similar stand. At the same time, I urge parliament to reject the proposed bill in its present form.
And that is my say.
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Monday, August 19, 2013
MOST OF OUR GOVERNORS ARE CLUELESS
Six months after they took over the leadership of counties in the devolved system of government in Kenya, most of our governors and county representatives are still groping in the dark, confused about how they will navigate the mucky terrain of politics and governance to deliver goods to their people.
Many of those leaders have no clue at all about the art of governance; many are still struggling to understand the constitution; and many others think flying a flag and being flanked by a bevy of body- guards is all there is in leadership. Don't get me wrong. Not all governors and county representatives are in this category. We have a few who have already shown promise and we should encourage them. But majority of our county leaders may end up needing some kind of reality awakening.
When I read that the governor of Nyeri county plans to construct an airstrip to provide a faster corridor for their key products of tea and coffee, I say hooray! When I hear the governor of Nairobi talk about concrete steps to rid the city of traffic jams so that business can run smoothly, I applaud. But when I hear governors talk about spending millions of shillings on entertainment, I boo. Equally, when I hear the governor of Uasin Gishu say that his budget would not be able to accomodate education and clean water, I shudder in disbelief.
What we are seeing in most counties - budgets that dont balance, unrealistic demands for perks; excessive expenditure on luxury cars and gyms and manifestos that are over-rated in terms of goals and timelines - is symptomatic of a serious management problem that could derail the whole concept of devolution and toperdo the high expectations of the people.
The confusion we are witnessing in some counties confirms the suspicion of many that our representatives did not take time to know their job descriptions before they went to ask for votes, and even now, do not understand their responsibilities as elected representatives. They jumped into the train without knowing where they were going and what they were going to do when they got where they were going. So, after winning they went into a state of delirium.
We all agree that there is no university in Kenya - or anywhere else - that gives hands-on training to incoming politicians on how to handle people and their problems on a day-to-day basis. Those who aspire to lead must therefore be people with inherent qualities of leadership: intelligence, selflessness, humility, charisma and honesty. Equally important, they must be people who are prepared to learn fast and willingly without incessant grumbling over trivialities.
Boycotting sessions to press for more money; throwing tantrums over flags and number plates, and bodyguards, and office space, will not bring development to the people. I can see the next five years zooming past without any yields coming from counties. If that happens, our people wil be demoralised, will lose confidence in the system and may see no need to vote in future polls.
And then there are those counties that are starting off with huge fiscal hurdles. Mombasa county, for example, has an outstanding debt of 4 billion shillings carried forward from the previous council. It can neither pay salaries nor remit statutory contributions to government agencies. Three of its accounts were recently frozen by the Kenya Revenue Authority because it cannot pay outstanding taxes amounting to more than 400 million shillings, Yet it has proposed a budget bigger than that of Nairobi. If the council implements that budget, it will face a huge budget deficit.
The chairman of the commission on revenue allocation, Micar Cheserem, summed it up recently when he said, perhaps the governors do not know the difference between a million and a billion. And it's possible.
My view is that if wananchi are to benefit from the devolved system, the central government must step in with pragmatic solutions to help the counties manage the 210 billion shillings it has allocated them.
And that is my say.
Many of those leaders have no clue at all about the art of governance; many are still struggling to understand the constitution; and many others think flying a flag and being flanked by a bevy of body- guards is all there is in leadership. Don't get me wrong. Not all governors and county representatives are in this category. We have a few who have already shown promise and we should encourage them. But majority of our county leaders may end up needing some kind of reality awakening.
When I read that the governor of Nyeri county plans to construct an airstrip to provide a faster corridor for their key products of tea and coffee, I say hooray! When I hear the governor of Nairobi talk about concrete steps to rid the city of traffic jams so that business can run smoothly, I applaud. But when I hear governors talk about spending millions of shillings on entertainment, I boo. Equally, when I hear the governor of Uasin Gishu say that his budget would not be able to accomodate education and clean water, I shudder in disbelief.
What we are seeing in most counties - budgets that dont balance, unrealistic demands for perks; excessive expenditure on luxury cars and gyms and manifestos that are over-rated in terms of goals and timelines - is symptomatic of a serious management problem that could derail the whole concept of devolution and toperdo the high expectations of the people.
The confusion we are witnessing in some counties confirms the suspicion of many that our representatives did not take time to know their job descriptions before they went to ask for votes, and even now, do not understand their responsibilities as elected representatives. They jumped into the train without knowing where they were going and what they were going to do when they got where they were going. So, after winning they went into a state of delirium.
We all agree that there is no university in Kenya - or anywhere else - that gives hands-on training to incoming politicians on how to handle people and their problems on a day-to-day basis. Those who aspire to lead must therefore be people with inherent qualities of leadership: intelligence, selflessness, humility, charisma and honesty. Equally important, they must be people who are prepared to learn fast and willingly without incessant grumbling over trivialities.
Boycotting sessions to press for more money; throwing tantrums over flags and number plates, and bodyguards, and office space, will not bring development to the people. I can see the next five years zooming past without any yields coming from counties. If that happens, our people wil be demoralised, will lose confidence in the system and may see no need to vote in future polls.
And then there are those counties that are starting off with huge fiscal hurdles. Mombasa county, for example, has an outstanding debt of 4 billion shillings carried forward from the previous council. It can neither pay salaries nor remit statutory contributions to government agencies. Three of its accounts were recently frozen by the Kenya Revenue Authority because it cannot pay outstanding taxes amounting to more than 400 million shillings, Yet it has proposed a budget bigger than that of Nairobi. If the council implements that budget, it will face a huge budget deficit.
The chairman of the commission on revenue allocation, Micar Cheserem, summed it up recently when he said, perhaps the governors do not know the difference between a million and a billion. And it's possible.
My view is that if wananchi are to benefit from the devolved system, the central government must step in with pragmatic solutions to help the counties manage the 210 billion shillings it has allocated them.
And that is my say.
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
The proposed Kenya referendum: Is it well-intentioned or a political ploy?
If Raila Amolo Odinga gets his way, Kenyans could go to another referendum within the next few years for the third time in the country's history - this time not to enact a new constitution, but to decide on amendments that could significantly change the way this country is governed.
Raila, the undisputed leader of the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD), has adopted a revolutionary pet project which, if Kenyans approve, could see the dismantlement of the present republican system of government and the introduction of a parliamentary system.
Separately, the Senate has made it known that it would push a series of amendments through a referendum to give devolved governments more fiscal and operating powers. These may look like two different initiatives but they are actually driven by the same man.
The presidential system which we have used for 50 years is not perfect and a change to a parliamentary system is not bad. But the timing and motive of this proposal is suspect. It appears to me that the CORD leader is only trying to find a back-door route to the presidency by claiming that the current system shuts out smaller tribes from reaching the high office.
Is Raila just realising that? How come he did not advance that argument before the 2007 polls, or even before the 2012 elections. Why did he choose to play along, when he didn't believe in the presidential system? Was it because he thought he would win and enjoy the powers normally vested in the executive?
Raila's current campaign is a political ploy meant to benefit him as a presidential candidate in the next elections and not a genuine initiative to reform our governance structure. He knows well that under the present constitution, the president does not enjoy the kind of powers the last three presidencies enjoyed. That is why he is rooting for the executive premiership.
The truth is, both systems have cons and pros. In a parliamentary system, people elect MPs who then elect the Prime Minister. MPs can also pass a vote of no-confidence on their leader at any time during the parliamentary term. The down-side, however, is that people don't get a chance to pick their chief executive, an option some say is not democratic.
On the other hand, the presidential system rests all powers on the president. Under this system chances of a leader becoming authoritarian are high. We saw it here with President Moi. On the positive side, however, people get a chance to elect their leader directly. Where institutions work, like in the United States, the presidential system is undoubtedly more democratic.
Finally, I want to submit that both Raila's proposal and the Senate's move are dangerous for this country. We have just come out of a very complex electoral exercise. For the rest of this year, the country will go through dozens of by-elections as a result of successful petitions filed by candidates in various elective offices. If the referendum takes place in the next two years, the country will be thrown into an active campaign mood, only two years before the next general election in 2017. Can we really afford almost four years of continuos campaigns? The answer is no.
We have a government that is busy trying to implement promises it made to the people of Kenya, and we cannot afford the kind of distractions accompanying a referendum. The bottom line is that our country is just too fragile and too divided to take the weight of a politically-motivated plebiscite.
.
And that is my say.
Raila, the undisputed leader of the Coalition for Reforms and Democracy (CORD), has adopted a revolutionary pet project which, if Kenyans approve, could see the dismantlement of the present republican system of government and the introduction of a parliamentary system.
Separately, the Senate has made it known that it would push a series of amendments through a referendum to give devolved governments more fiscal and operating powers. These may look like two different initiatives but they are actually driven by the same man.
The presidential system which we have used for 50 years is not perfect and a change to a parliamentary system is not bad. But the timing and motive of this proposal is suspect. It appears to me that the CORD leader is only trying to find a back-door route to the presidency by claiming that the current system shuts out smaller tribes from reaching the high office.
Is Raila just realising that? How come he did not advance that argument before the 2007 polls, or even before the 2012 elections. Why did he choose to play along, when he didn't believe in the presidential system? Was it because he thought he would win and enjoy the powers normally vested in the executive?
Raila's current campaign is a political ploy meant to benefit him as a presidential candidate in the next elections and not a genuine initiative to reform our governance structure. He knows well that under the present constitution, the president does not enjoy the kind of powers the last three presidencies enjoyed. That is why he is rooting for the executive premiership.
The truth is, both systems have cons and pros. In a parliamentary system, people elect MPs who then elect the Prime Minister. MPs can also pass a vote of no-confidence on their leader at any time during the parliamentary term. The down-side, however, is that people don't get a chance to pick their chief executive, an option some say is not democratic.
On the other hand, the presidential system rests all powers on the president. Under this system chances of a leader becoming authoritarian are high. We saw it here with President Moi. On the positive side, however, people get a chance to elect their leader directly. Where institutions work, like in the United States, the presidential system is undoubtedly more democratic.
Finally, I want to submit that both Raila's proposal and the Senate's move are dangerous for this country. We have just come out of a very complex electoral exercise. For the rest of this year, the country will go through dozens of by-elections as a result of successful petitions filed by candidates in various elective offices. If the referendum takes place in the next two years, the country will be thrown into an active campaign mood, only two years before the next general election in 2017. Can we really afford almost four years of continuos campaigns? The answer is no.
We have a government that is busy trying to implement promises it made to the people of Kenya, and we cannot afford the kind of distractions accompanying a referendum. The bottom line is that our country is just too fragile and too divided to take the weight of a politically-motivated plebiscite.
.
And that is my say.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)