Presidential it is!

The Parliamentary Select Committee yesterday came to a consensus on the type of government. Kenya will have a powerful president whose authority will be checked by Parliament, The Judiciary and Regional Governments. Furthermore, the margin between the Executive and Parliament has been widened – Cabinet Ministers will be Experts and will not be Members of Parliament.

This arrangement was agreed upon on Wednesday night by the PSC on the Constitution meeting at the Great Rift Valley Lodge in Naivasha.

Apart from the Executive, the committee will today also delve into the chapters on the Legislature, representation, the Judiciary and devolution. This will continue through to Wednesday. No formal announcement of the decision has been made and the information about the agreement was obtained through media interviews of MPs attending the session.

The meeting is covered by parliamentary rules and and members are barred from revealing discussions. This could be a significant point in Kenya’s journey to get a new constitution. But what does it mean? You can head over to the CSO Katiba Yetu Blog and post your opinions.

Again, what does it mean? Take a look at the following table in comparison of the pros and cons of each governance system:

Pros and Cons of the Parliamentary and Presidential System

PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEM
PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEM
Pros:

  1. Faster and easier to pass laws
  2. Even spread of power
  3. Stronger party discipline
  4. Clear lines of responsibility
Pros:

  1. Direct mandate and legitimacy through elections
  2. Clear separation of powers between Executive, Legislature and Judiciary
  3. Speed in making important decisions
  4. A fixed term provides for more stability
Cons:

  1. The government is divided
  2. Minority rights are not guaranteed
  3. More susceptible to coalitions
Cons:

  1. Can easily turn into a dictatorship
  2. Less accountability as three arms engage in blame game
  3. Not easy to change leadership

Now that Kenya might have a presidential system. Let us take a look at how the system works.

How the Presidential System works.

  • The President is the Head of State and Head of Government
  • Office holder is elected directly by the voters
  • He/She appoints cabinet, even from outside parliament
  • President has powers to deploy military and declare war
  • Clear separation of the powers of the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary


You need to Log in to post a comment or contribute to the blog

Kenya could borrow, and discard, from Nigeria’s constitution making

Members of the public with a copy of the Harmonised Draft Constitution during its official launch. FILE

Members of the public with a copy of the Harmonised Draft Constitution during its official launch. FILE

It is a season of political pottery in “pro-democracy” Africa and Nigerians must hold a record in this form of art.

Out of every ten efforts of crafting new and suitable constitutions in Africa, nine took place in Nigeria.

Military regimes led the way in this business. Between the murderous military coup of 1966 and the three year civil war (1967 -1970), the generals pulled in willing constitutional lawyers, crafty civilian bureaucrats and politicians to have them carve up Nigeria’s federated three regions into a total patchwork of 37 states. Out of exasperation and exhaustion (with often selfish governance by politicians), came outbursts of energy for constitutional engineering.

This exhaustion and the urge to multiply arenas for wielding power —read states– seems to have also sprung out of Kenya after President Daniel Arap Moi’s harsh and contentious “nyayo” (or footsteps).

Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution introduced 774 local governments as the lowest level of power. Kenya’s draft constitution, released to the public on November 17, 2009, named in First Schedule (Article 5(2), an already existing total of 222 counties as lowest levels of administration. There is a promise of new ones being created but more interest seemed to lie in burying ancient titles like provincial commissioners, district officers and chiefs. These are associated with colonial dictatorships which Presidents Jomo Kenyatta and Moi seem to have cherished.

PCs have been recast as regional directors while counties have grabbed the ceremonial colonial power pinnacle of governor.

The Nigerian record does have a vital lesson here. It shows that direct voting for chairmen and councillors of local governments have brought little material and moral benefits to the voters.

Although the period between 1999 and 20007 saw President Obasanjo’s regime pouring huge sums of money to local governments, corruption grabbed most of it down throats that knew no end.

Military and colonial whips and their silencing of the people from 1900 to 1999, had not trained in the mass citizens habits and reflexes of shouting “stop thief” at elected officials who turned into unarmed robbers. As a mark of exasperation, the Yar’Adua government has promised fire and tears to corrupt local government officials. One can only hope that Kenya’s anti-corruption warriors will put active hooks in the waters of democracy at the grassroots level to catch the small fry before graduating to sharks of corruption.

The Kenyan 2009 Draft is far ahead of Nigeria in seeking to promote the entry of women into legislatures and executive posts at this level. Article 125 (1) (a) and (b), however, send alarming signals.

Elections to Regional Assemblies show loss of trust in the direct voice of the voters and gives voting power exclusively to “elected members of the county assemblies in each region acting as electoral colleges”.

In Nigeria this strategy was used by an unholy alliance between local feudal rulers and the British colonial government to shut out candidates like bicycle repairers, barbers, tailors and small retail traders who had defeated local sons of oppressive Emirs (chiefs) and their officials.

It is an unholy legacy which puts women candidates (who tend to have little money for contesting elections, including bribing party bosses), at dreadful disadvantages. If the spectre that national-level politicians fear is that of too many officials (those elected to regional and county assemblies), learning the ropes of reaping votes from grassroots voters, this proposed cure diminishes chances of women winning elections with greater transparency; and getting soiled by corruption and bribery.

There are other common fears. Article 187 in the Kenya 2009 British parliamentarians enjoy for ensuring accountability by ministers and their prime minister, namely “Question Time” during which MPs, particularly the opposition, puncture holes into brains and egos of ministers with the use of “supplementary questions” to those provided in writing in advance.

The merit of “Question Time” is in training sharp wits in both the cabinet and their opposition enemies. With it the politician goes to war as a learning ecology; and the media love to harvest its casualties.

Nigeria’s politicians probably dodged a tradition (whose best practitioners in the British parliament were trained in the rough debating clubs of Oxford University), because they lacked such an infrastructure. The lesson for Kenya’s political engineers may be the need to link adult political practices to skills invested in the country’s educational institutions.

Article 188 in the Kenya 2009 Draft also shares with Nigeria that imperial American tradition of seeing the “State President” as royalty who should not routinely be seen debating government policies with brawling cabinet members. This tradition was attractive to Nigerians who in their ancient traditions valued monarchs; monarchs who wouldn’t shout and eat in public. And like Ancient Egyptian Pharaohs, to whom some Nigerian fiefdoms trace their ancestry, the president should be sheltered from arrows in eyes of the public when doing undignified things like sitting down and standing up from their seats.

Accordingly, it could be argued that Nigeria’s first parliament (1960 -1965), killed politics because the more educated southern members of the opposition political parties subjected northern ministers and parliamentarians to brutal intellectual harassment. The example of the American monarchical and distant presidency was attractive to those, who in 1978, built the new road to power by President Shehu Shagari (1979-1983). Shagari was an aristocrat from Sokoto in the north-west and had served in the cabinet of Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa.

Kenya came from a tradition of cruel colonial racial aristocracy, headed by a Governor General who was distant. His immediate successor to power was Jomo Kenyatta. In 1967 Kenyatta told a British newspaper that he planned to create a local aristocracy in Kenya because it had ensured stability in British politics. Recent historical journalism published in the Daily Nation shows that Kenyatta used land to create that aristocracy. It is a tradition which Oginga Odinga and Bildad Kaggia’s Kenya People’s Union, KPU, had threatened to upset. There may be echoes here of that cherished and wished “sound of silence”. One way out of it may be to have the State President shooting the breeze with the Cabinet at least once a month with the Cabinet. It would open a predictable window for him to share his vision; and hear other visions.

One thing Kenyans could usefully tease out from Nigeria’s constitutional memory is that of holding onto the wisdom of their power ancestors.

Nigerians hold onto a sacred power tribe which consists of former living presidents and Heads of State, Presidents of the Senate, speakers of the House of Representatives and Chief Justices of the federation to constitute what is called the National Council of State. The council is joined by current governors of States (the equivalent of Regional Directors in Kenya’s Draft), in their exhibition of the wisdom of elders.

With a rich history of military coups and subsequent refrains from killing ousted rulers following the notorious slaughters of January 15, 1966 and February 13, 1976, Nigeria has little problem filling a conference hall which these halloed elders.

Kenya may have only one living former President. Even when Mwai Kibaki leaves office, Kenya will have only two compared to Nigeria’s six.

Recalling frantic efforts made by civil society groups in Nairobi to find voices that would bring restraint to boiling tempers as the violence that hit Kenya after the 2007 elections rolled on, there may be good reason to take a deep look at this Nigerian experience.

Both Nigeria and Kenya have shared the tendency to define “national security” in terms of military weapons. Articles 280 and 282, Kenya’s Draft Constitution of 2009 exclude the country’s Governor of the Central Bank and the ministers of finance, agriculture, health, industry and trade from membership of the proposed National Security Council.

A guess would catch the Committee of Experts falling into the deep hole of not seeing Kenya’s economic strength and the prosperity of the masses of her citizens as tools for national security. Yet, examples of HIV and Aids and swine flue (as products of biological manipulations of genes as effective weapons of undeclared war), do send vital signals which cannot be ignored by Kenya waving armoured tanks and helicopter gunships.

Likewise, sharing Nigeria’s failure to create a national Oceanographic Commission into the constitution ignores the historic role that the Indian Ocean and the Atlantic Oceans have written in the legacy of freedom, independence and human dignity in Africa’s international relations.

Source: DAILY NATION


You need to Log in to post a comment or contribute to the blog

Kenyans must make cautious decision on draft constitution

Kenyans ought to make a cautious decision on the recently unveiled draft constitution. I am saying so because I have read through it carefully and concluded that we may in future regret our choices.

We all have to ask ourselves: “What was the problem that necessitated a constitution change?” I dare say it was the elusive power as a man had grown roots at State House, so a constitution change was the only way to kick him out.

Then he left, but we have since adopted the constitution route to address our political, social and economic discontentment. Our leaders have taken it upon themselves to play around, create rifts and bring more confusion to Kenyans as to the right direction to take.

We took a decision to enact the National Accord and Reconciliation Act in the Constitution to restore peace and order. The office of the prime minister was established to share power with the president.

As we wait for the Independent Interim Boundary Review Commission to conclude its work, whatever devil has possessed us to think that such a measure will guarantee effective representation? It is the will of the state, the Government and the people that will achieve this end, and not the level of devolution.

LEWIS LORE,
Nairobi.

—————

In an environment of political turbulence, politicians need to be very conscious of their public utterances, lest they stifle the progress of the constitution review. Let the people decide what they want; we do not need the politicians’ decisions any more.

They have always deceived and misled the people, and this time, the people should not let this happen. All Kenyans should be given enough time and a conducive environment to freely make decisions and air their views about how they think the harmonised draft constitution should best suit Kenyans’ wishes and dreams.

Politicians should stop meddling in the process. This is not a campaign period, and it has nothing to do with the current prime minister or the president. It is time to show the world that, despite the many weaknesses and failures on the part of the Kenyan leadership, we can still govern ourselves as an independent and sovereign state without international supervision.

ONYANGO JACOB OTIENO,
Maseno.

Source: DAILY NATION


You need to Log in to post a comment or contribute to the blog

Lets heed Ghai’s advice on

On Wednesday, Prof Yash Pal Ghai had a few truths to tell Kenyans about the dangers facing the enactment of a new constitution: There will be none at all unless politicians set aside their differences.

Related Stories

The former Constitution of Kenya Review Commission chairman, who is still sore that all the efforts and funds expended on the Bomas process came to nought, was categorical on this point: “We shall not get a new constitution until politicians set aside their differences and think of the nation first.”

In 2002, he said, President Kibaki failed to honour a power-sharing deal between his NAK faction and Raila Odinga’s LDP faction of the ruling Narc, and the fall-out affected the fate of the constitution review.

The same thing, he said, could happen if the differences between the same two players spilled over into the latest attempt to make a new constitution.

Kenyans can only hope the professor’s words are not prophetic, but the omens are not good. The grumbling going on about inequities on the power-sharing deal is beginning to sound eerily familiar.

Could it be that politicians are preparing for another round of bruising supremacy battles at a time when the country is being ravaged from all sides by food shortages, high inflation, and endless grand larceny?

Prof Ghai rues the fact that politicians are again being allowed to drive the constitution review process. He has a point. But is it possible that those same politicians may not want a new constitution, after all?

Source: DAILY NATION


You need to Log in to post a comment or contribute to the blog

Constitution: Kenyans will not let MPs hold them to ransom

The deadlock over who wields executive authority in government serves no meaning to wananchi. It undermines the efforts of the committee of experts and is a likely way of derailing the new constitution. Why does it become hard to adopt the whole document? Kenyans are desperately in need of the new constitution and are not going to stand any negative campaign against it for personal reasons.

We have less than two years to seek fresh mandate from the electorates. What makes our leaders think they can tamper with the draft and the public will still support it? I can now see why some thinker once said that a politician looks at the next General Election while a leader looks at the next generation.

If PNU and ODM could harmonise their positions on other issues such as representation, legislature and the rest, why not accept this section the way it is? The political elite must think of the long way we’ve come in search for the new constitution. If we had the document earlier, last year would have been averted.

SYLVANCE NYAKITI,
Kakamega

—————–

The time given to Kenyans by the Committee of Experts on Constitutional Review to study the draft seems short. Constitution-making should involve intensive consultations. It seems that the committee of experts is making unnecessary haste. While this document is long overdue, Kenyans should have enough time to study the draft and put forward their opinions. Prof Yash Pal Ghai suggested least three months.

Again the hullabaloo on Kadhi’s courts is, to say the truth, irrelevant. Coming from Mombasa where majority of Muslims live, we Christians have never been affected, whatsoever by the Kadhi’s courts. Many Christians didn’t know it even existed before it was blown out of proportion by intolerant clergymen. Our Muslim brothers have every right to their harmless systems.

STANLEY MRUU NGANGA,
Kitengela

—————–

Kenyans hope the Cabinet retreat at the weekend will yield results. We hope the chest-thumping that characterises the running of the coalition government will give way to inspired leadership.

Ministers who refuse to return fuel guzzlers should be sacked. Rift Valley MPs casting aspersions on the PM for his efforts to save the Mau should drop their hard-line stance and help reclaim the water tower.

Then there is the new constitution. Events leading up to the 2005 referendum debacle should never recur. Both sides of the political divide must sing the same hymn.

VINCENT NDEGE MAOSA,
Nairobi

Source: DAILY NATION


You need to Log in to post a comment or contribute to the blog

The Harmonized Draft Contitution

The Committee of Experts on the Constitutional Review have released its harmonized draft for public debate. All eyes are riveted on the Kenyatta International Conference Centre where the event kicked of from 10 am this Tuesday, 17th November 2009. This proposed draft has been dubbed “Harmonized” since it borrows a lot from the past drafts which include the Bomas, Kilifi and the Wako documents. Today marks a new era and could be the defining moment in Kenya’s 20 year old struggle for reforms in the constitution. Significant changes in the current constitution include the appeal of Section 2A by the former president Hon. Daniel Toroitich Arap Moi and in 2005 Kenya came close to having a new constitution when the highly politicized Wako Draft was subjected to a referendum.

Some of the reasons why the bWako draft was rejected heavily included lack of awareness. However, the Constitutional Review Process by the COE has been a collaborative process where major stakeholders: Kenyans, have been called upon to take part by debating and making submissions on the draft for the next 30 days after which their reviews wil be taken into consideration in later drafts.

Executive power still remains a sticking point with the main coalition partners haggling over whether Kenya should have a presidential system or a premiership. Some of the proposals which shall be subjected to a 30 day public debate include the following:

  • The President to perform functions that relate to the State while the Prime Minister will chair the Cabinet.
  • In curing rival ethnic leanings, the top four officials – President, Deputy President, Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister will come from different regions or different ethnic communities
  • The draft will seek to ensure that a third of the House is made up of women MPs, that is 74 seats reserved for women.
  • Set up a 100 member Senate Chamber of Parliament which will sit in Nairobi but draw membership from the regions it seeks to establish.
  • Increase the number of constituencies from 210 to 284 and reserve between five or six seats for groups of special interest.
  • Retain eight regions proposed along the current provinces but create 74 counties.
  • Nairobi residents to directly elect their members while those from other regions fall under Governors.


You need to Log in to post a comment or contribute to the blog