What could possibly go wrong?
Baba Yao, who until quite recently was not really a resident of Kenya's most fat-walleted county, is not the type to ignore the plight of his voters. In Embakasi his Embakasi-style leadership made some cringe but it secured him votes even in his new political sinecure of Kabete. So when he decided to bring some of the Embakasi style to the drinking dens of Kabete, it was just a matter of time before Kiambu's favourite son joined him in his war against alcoholism.
What the Commander-in-Chief forgot, or failed to realise, is that while Baba Yao may have legions of followers, his campaign stood or fell based on what his immediate political interests happened to be. He is not a politician of national consequence and his Embakasi-style of doing things is notorious because he cuts such a buffoonish figure. No one really takes him seriously and when left well alone his mind tends to wander and he loses interest in whatever had caught his fancy.
The Commander-in-Chief, on the other had, is a consequential political figure and a symbol of national unity. If he turns his bilious eye on you, it is we, the people, who turn our bilious eyes on you. If he orders "the youth" to fight "illicit liquor" in effect he is ordering all Kenyans who fall within that demographic to fight illicit liquor. He declared a war on illicit liquor; many legitimate businessmen have been attacked, their premises vandalised and hundreds of millions of shillings worth of liquor poured down the drain. He really should have seen this coming.
The Commander-in-Chief is right to worry about the alcoholism among Kenya's youth. Anecdotal evidence around the Mount Kenya region points to a crisis. Indeed, many reports have been published regarding the substance-abuse crisis among the youthful population of Kenya. His solution has been an expansion of the NYS annual recruitment and expanded opportunities for youth-owned business to participate in public tenders. The success or failure of his solutions continues to rely heavily on the probity of the men and women tasked with implementing them. The results, so far, have been mixed. Turning the youth into a national vigilante force has been a disaster.
Last night, two schoolboys were admitted in hospital nursing severe head wounds. They had taken part in a vigilante attack on a proprietor of a drinking establishment at which it was alleged illicit liquor was offered for sale. The old man was not ready to succumb to mob rule. He armed himself with a simi and faced off with the angry mob. The two boys were victims of his simi-wielding skills. Interviewed on TV, they said that they were implementing the President's directive to wipe out illicit liquor in Kenya.
Presidents are not part of the rabble. They are not men of the people. Their words have great import. Their words must not be intemperate. They must weigh carefully what they urge their people to do. In Kenya, especially, every decree of the President, whether lawful or not, will almost certainly be acted on. His anti-illicit liquor campaign is all well and good; he should have known better than to speak intemperately. Those two boys in the hospital are the victims of presidential-speech-in-anger. He really should have known better.
2 comments:
...Ofcourse, he should have known better! please flip the coin and consider the following also: I agree its easy to come to your conclusion from the activities of the last few days of fighting illicit alcohol, but spare a moment to empathize the plight of tens of parents whose sons and daughters met early graves due the the alcohol, another moment for hundreds of the wives and husbands who watch helplessly as their spouses waste away in drunken stupor, for the thousands of orphans who stare at a bleak future snatched away by the illicit brews, and finally for the hundreds of thousands whom having hereto been addicted now cant find anything strong enough to quench their thirst and unlock them from zombie-like life they find themselves in.
Only then we shall we start the conversation on the proportionality of lives lost vs unintended consequences occasioned by losses by the industry
I hope the above comment is not from one of Itumbi's botnets. But if it is..
How is it an entire generation has succumbed to the Devil's Water? To the best of my knowledge, the alcoholics who have ruined their lives and destroyed their families did not have pangas brandished in their faces to compel them to drink. They did so voluntarily. Their parents watched as they slid down the slippery slope of substance abuse. The politicians egging them on to commit unlawful acts in the fight against "illicit" liquor are principal investors, either in the manufacture, distribution or sale of alcoholic drinks. Talk about conflicts-of-interest.
Alcoholism, sir, is not an offence under the laws of Kenya. Vigilante justice has always been unlawful, even with presidential endorsement and a vanguard of parliamentarians leading the charge. Thousands of Kenyans have legitimately invested in a lawful business. Innuendo is not proof that can withstand the test of litigation in court. You weep over the families destroyed by booze? I weep for the complete negation of the rule-of-law mantra that we have been sold as a panacea for impunity by the same men and women going all Jack Bauer on legitimate businessmen.
Post a Comment