Article 10 of the Constitution of Kenya rarely attracts attention save for when it is waved in State and public officers' faces with demands for "public participation" whenever Government engages in secretive public policy shenanigans. But Article 10 is much more than the "public participation" Article; it is the foundation for the safeguarding of our rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in Chapter Four. Without Article 10, the State - especially the State - will run roughshod over us and make a mockery of Chapter Four. And where the State goes, so go the rest of the country.
One of the principles by which "all State organs, State officers and public officers" are bound, is the principle of good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability. It goes hand in hand with our right of access to information held by the State under Article 35, which contributes enormously to our sovereign right as citizens to hold State and public officers to account. In my humble opinion, the Nairobi Metropolitan Services, its Director-General and everyone connected to this demonseed, make a mockery of Article 10 and the principle of good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability.
I have had occasion to joust with the proponents of the militarisation of public services and, even accounting for their deep frustrations with the way Nairobi's governors have governed, I can find no persuasive reasons for why they would simply allow NMS to operate the way it does and fail to connect its perfidious approach to transparency and accountability as of a piece with the ineptitude and graft of Nairobi's City Fathers.
Don't get me wrong. I enjoy well-paved and well-lit city streets, efficient water and sanitation services, effective public health facilities, and predictable rule-enforcement in building and construction. But, even taking into account the shenanigans of Messrs Sonko and Kidero and their bands of misfits, we knew who was responsible for what. We could identify them. We knew how much the County Assembly had appropriated for their operations. We new the rationalisations behind their decision-making because, by law, they had to publish their plans in advance. This is the transparency part of the equation. And because we knew, our elected representatives could demand action if there were lapses. Or failing that, we could sue. This is the accountability part of the equation. And all go to satisfying another of Article 10's principles: the rule of law.
The NMS has an effective public communications strategy. It has effectively publicised its successes in paving city streets, repairing city equipment and making lofty-sounding promises such as building new hospital facilities or hiring healthcare workers. It has been so good at PR that few question any more whether or not the rationale behind NMS is founded on the quicksand of constitutional hooliganism. In my opinion, the only difference between Mike Sonko and NMS is that NMS covers itself with the veneer of martial discipline. Rub some of its soft skin off and the casual constitutional violations are plain to see, not the least being fidelity to the principles and values of governance of good governance, integrity, transparency and accountability - and the rule of law.
It could be that the NMS has fine Kenyans in it, law-abiding and honourable. But so long as they piss on Article 10 with the same reckless abandon as NMS's creators, there is absolutely no reason why we should give them a free pass simply because they are very good at laying coloured cabro in town. If there is a place to draw the constitutional implementation line in this cesspit, it is with fidelity to Article 10 for ALL State and public officers, their do-gooding notwithstanding. If you can't obey the Constitution, then you have no business in public service, army-fatigue PR notwithstanding.
No comments:
Post a Comment