Will
it be style over substance, flash at the expense of real work? The
announcement of the first four nominees to the Cabinet by Uhuru Kenyatta
and William Ruto was certainly very different from the Mwai Kibaki and
Moi moulds. Moi relied on suspended terror; he would make announcements
in the most off-hand way. It became routine that every person concerned
paid due attention to the one O'Clock news bulletin on the radio - Voice
of Kenya as it was once - to discover whether they had kept their jobs
or were in deep doo-dah with the Head of State. Mwai Kibaki tended to
simply send a an announcement to media houses and stayed firmly behind
the high walls and security of State House. Mr Kenyatta's unveiling of
the four is the stuff of American-style politics, and it is a breath of
fresh air.
There are fears, however, that he intends to be a
micro-manager. These fears are without substance. There are other fears
that it will be all politics all the time when his Cabinet finally gets
to work. Again, these are without foundation. Just as are the fears that
he intends to make mince-meat of the human rights provisions of the
Constitution, especially freedom of association and speech. Nothing he
has done since he was sworn in suggests that these fears are warranted.
Indeed, his response to the Garissa massacres was criticized for not
being American enough, and second, for being too draconian when he
finally dispatched the Inspector-General and his internal security teams
to that benighted town.
Mr Kenyatta's is a markedly different
style from that of the self-styled Professor of Politics or of his
acolyte, Mwai Kibaki. Mr Kenyatta ran a campaign promising change: in
leadership and in governance. He has not ruled long enough for us to
stand in judgment of his style. His Cabinet is yet to start working;
neither is he yet to get the senior members o his civil service
appointed. When he does, and when they begin their work, only then will
we be able to determine whether he is the consummate back-seat driver or
something else entirely.
Many still colour his future with the
prism of the ICC. This is unfair, both for the President and for the
nation. In their every utterance, his most ardent detractors paint a
picture that is in dissonance with what we are seeing today. They argue
that because of his indictment by the international court, he will be
unable to discharge his functions of the office without distraction,
some of which may lead him to make improper or dangerous decisions. Some
have even attempted to link the free-laptop-per-child policy with the
ICC! Some have began worrying that the witnesses against him are
suddenly going to develop collective amnesia or that they are going to
suffer acute lead poisoning. None backs up any of his conspiracy
theories with hard facts or data.
This is not to say that we
should casually remain aloof as the world falls down around our ears.
The Constitution that we venerate so much provides for a more
interventionist citizenry if only we are willing to organise and play
our roles. Recent full-page ads in the dailies by various counties
regarding the 2013/2014 budget is a pointer to what we are required to
do to hold our elected leaders to account. The likes of Makau Mutua and
Maina Kiai may cavil from the comfort of their sinecures in civil
society, but it is at the grass-roots that Kenyans will be able t hold
their government to account. It begins by organisation and education. If
we do neither, and should Mr Kenyatta morph into a combination of his
late father and Mr Moi, we will have no one to blame but ourselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment