The Kenyan Crisis has Very little to do with Electoral Reforms

The current battle in Kenya is a continuation of rivalry between Luos and Kikuyus. It has very little to do with electoral reforms if any at all. The battle between the two communities dates back to 1960s during the days of the founding father of the nation and the then Luo Kingpin, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga. Jaramogi was in opposition and Jomo Kenyatta was the president. In one of the incidents that can be termed as among the early triggers of rivalry between the two communities, Kenyatta’s motorcade was attacked by an angry mob that wanted explanations on the killing of Tom Mboya who was a political figure from the Luo community. To clear passage for Kenyatta, the presidential security guards fired directly through the crowd killing and wounding many.

The two tribes remained political rivals until 2002 when the current opposition leader, Raila Odinga, rallied his tribesmen to support Mwai Kibaki, a Kikuyu, for presidency. Raila had convinced his tribesmen that the only way to get to power was by supporting a Kikuyu president. This came after Raila had unsuccessfully vied for presidency in 1997 only garnering 10% of the votes cast and coming behind the then president Moi and other two aspirants, Matiba and the same Mwai Kibaki, who were both Kikuyus. Raila supported Kibaki with the hope of getting the position of a Prime Minister whose provision was lacking in the constitution anyway. After failing to get the position of a Prime Minister, Raila and Kibaki fell out bringing back the historical rivalry and mistrust between the two main tribes in Kenya.

After the fallout, Raila vied for presidency against Kibaki in 2007 and garnered a considerable number of votes. There are unconfirmed claims that Raila had actually won the 2007 elections which led to post election violence in the East African nation. Raila vied for presidency in 2013 against the current president Uhuru Kenyatta, another Kikuyu and lost. Though he petitioned the nation’s Supreme Court, the court confirmed the legitimacy of Uhuru’s election.

In the just concluded election which happened on 8^th of August this year, Raila lost yet again to a Kikuyu. He petitioned the court and the election was nullified. He then proceeded to make demands of resignation and prosecution of electoral officers who had manned the cancelled election. No resignation or arrest has been made so far. Raila further presented a list of 34 demands to the nation’s electoral body and threatened not to take part in the elections if all his demands were not addressed. The nation’s electoral commission responded to the list but Raila was not satisfied. He has actually jokingly made a statement to withdraw from the election slated for 26^th October though he did not follow withdrawal formalities.

To further express his dissatisfaction with the electoral body, Odinga called for demonstrations. The demonstrations were once per week but have since been made a daily affair. Raila claims that the demonstrations are meant to seek reforms but it is hard to believe his words.

To start with, he has failed to formally engage the electoral commission and remained adamant that his demands must be met for any election to take place. It would have been prudent for Raila to get back to the commission once he received the response of the commission on his 34 demands.

Second, Raila may be suffering the effects of realizing that this presents his last attempt to ascend to power. Why has he not staged such a fight before? Actually the August election can be termed as the most transparent in the country’s history. Raila had fought tooth and nail to ensure that there were systems in place that would deter any form of electoral malpractices. That he succeeded in doing. The thought of however not being able to ascend to power may be giving him sleepless nights. The current demonstrations are thus not primarily meant to achieve electoral reforms but massage his ego.

Third, Raila has perpetually increased his demands a move that could be interpreted to mean that he is actually not interested in reforms. He has increased his demands from initially seeking resignation of the electoral commission’s CEO, to seeking resignation of commissioners. He went as far as attacking corporates such as Safaricom Ltd, which is the nation’s largest Telecommunications Company that was awarded the tender of transmitting the results during the August 8^th elections.

Fourth, Raila insists that his supporters are engaging in peaceful demonstrations when there are videos of them carrying stones and attacking private businesses and property. Despite the evidence, he has not been heard to seek any apology or even warning his supporters against destruction.

Fifth, the commission that he is fighting has invited him for a dialogue but he has declined the invitation.

Sixth, Raila’s move to jokingly withdraw from the race was in bad faith and only intended to prolong the crisis in the nation. He hoped that the election would be pushed further until the courts ruled for the inclusion of other candidates who had vied in the August 8^th election.

Seventh, his supporters have triggered the debate of cessation with the argument that they have been oppressed for long. The battle is therefore not only meant to fight for electoral reforms, but also settle historical scores. It has camouflaged from one meant to seek reforms in the nation’s electoral body to one aimed at bringing down the Kikuyu led government.

The feelings of oppression may be justified, but the Luo nation has over the years failed to establish a clear ascent-to-power structure. On the contrary, the Kikuyu nation, otherwise referred to as uthamaki, has established itself over the years. The Luos feel that they have been oppressed and denied power yet over the years they have been building an individual instead of strengthening leadership structure within their community.

Now that the one individual they have been building is becoming frail both physically and in terms of tact, he wants to paint uthamaki as bad and corrupt people. He has widened his battle from targeting the electoral body to targeting the presidency and his supporters.

Odinga has failed to clinch power for the three times he has vied and cannot imagine losing this one which is possibly his last attempt. He is now trying to hold the country hostage by threatening that no elections will take place in his strongholds. The Kenyan electoral law says that an election can only be said to have taken place when each of the country’s 290 constituencies take part. Kenyans are waiting to see whether Odinga will succeed to stop elections from taking place in the constituencies that he commands support, hence succeeding in stopping a new government from taking power.