What Charles Kanjama misses

"For the Constitution, its key end is to promote the majority will and uphold the common good through a well-designed governance structure"
- Charles Kanjama, Interpretation of the Constitution should respect oath of office (Standard on Sunday, 16 September, 2012)

Abraham Lincoln's definition of democracy as government of the people, by the people and for the people, did not mention the will of the majority. The Greek tradition of the educated elite making all the decisions cannot be applied easily. Nor can the Chinese-style benevolent dictatorship flourish in our current political environment. The less said of the Iranian theocracy or the Stalinism of North Korea, the better.

The will of the majority can only be determined through democratic means. It is here that Mr Kanjama fails to demonstrate that such means exist. Kenyans have been led by nose for decades, listening to all the voices in the political arena to the total exclusion of all others. The results of the 2010 referendum were a demonstration of the will of the majority according to the mandarins of the Interim Independent Electoral Commission. The appointment of the Supreme Court was the will of the majority. Is Mr Kanjama claiming that the will of the majority was wrong all along? We have made our bed of roses and we must now lay in it, thorns and all.

Why is it that the contemporary strain of conservatism is obsessed with the sexual lives and sexuality of the majority they claim to speak for? Why is it that they are not declaiming on the current state of financial affairs of the state? Why is it they are not promoting the rejuvenation of public institutions or the inculcation of the rule of law in the people? With them it is sex and sex only, to the total exclusion of all else. Their pronouncements of the state of the family merely constantly remind us of the assault that the family is under.

Their obsession in determining the rights of women over their bodies or of the sexual activities of the people limits their influence over the body politic. They must know that Kenyans do not want to discuss sexual matters. Ever. We would rather let sleeping dogs lie and turn a blind eye to homosexuals of all stripes. If indeed they are worried about the state of the family and the eviscerating effects of a free-for-all abortion environment, why is it that their programmes do not reduce the chances of unplanned pregnancy or the support for the hapless women and girls who fall pregnant? Simply asking the state to punish all who are involved in an abortion is not a credible solution. Neither is jailing every man who has sex with another man or woman who does so with another woman.

Before the will of the majority can be ascertained, we must have the means of ascertaining it. For better or worse, we have chosen for ourselves a political system that places at its heart the political party and an elected government. Therefore, the will of the majority can only be clear when the majority participates fully in the political process, by becoming members of political parties, participating in party activities (including the nomination of leaders who subscribe to their values and ideals), and recreating the spirit of Harambee that was the bedrock of communal public-spiritedness of the 1970s and 1980s. To promote the majority will and uphold the common good, we must revive the political institutions that are the vehicles of these ends.