Tuesday, January 08, 2013

Kicks of a dying horse?


Scratch the surface and you'll discover that the veneer we've spread over our politics hides a sclerotic dysfunctional system that has all but collapsed. Change either comes gradually or in one radical transformation. Kenya has been in transition since 1992. Two decades later and it is possible for some to be suffering from fatigue at the snail's pace of progress. 2007 represented the nadir in the process, though the disappointments of 2003 and 2005 revealed that the reform process was under siege at all times. But we have reached a plateau where the old ways are no longer viable. It is for this reason that that the circus surrounding the formation of alliances and coalitions, and how to manage them, reveals the limits of old school tactics.

It is important to realise that Kenya is far from being ready for an issues based political discourse. Issues may agitate the elite in their urban conclaves or the upper reaches of the civil service, academia and the diplomatic circuit, but in a Kenya in transition, the tribal strongman counts for more than all the white and green papers a politician can marshal to memory. But the myth of the Big Man means that there is a deep entrenchment of the idea that the Big Man will make all the Big Decisions; all decisions are Big Decisions. When one exams the looming shambles that will be the nominations on December 17th, one can identify the Big Man syndrome as the foundation of that chaos.

When CORD and Jubilee and the other alliances were being mooted, party constitutions did not address the questions of what rules would be applied during the nominations, whether they could be conducted jointly or individually, or whether a hybrid system would be designed to handle the situation. The main aim, it seems, of the alliances was to lock out this or that ethnic community from this or that region. Agostinho Neto, the man who succeeded to the late Orwa Ojode's Ndhiwa seat and Kipchumba Murkomen a candidate in the March elections, do not necessarily see the Big Man politics of Kenya as a bad thing. But surely they must agree that it has had a pernicious impact on decision-making and planning.

It seems, with the possible exception of The National Alliance, that Kenya's political parties remain perilously unprepared to handle the routine affairs of the parties such as recruiting and registering members, maintaining and updating registers, reporting to party members decisions of the top organs of the party, or such important events as nomination exercises to choose the party's candidates at elections. ODM especially, stands accused of being Raila Odinga's party in all but name. He is not alone in this; being the most vibrant party until the departures of William Ruto, Musalia Mudavadi and their acolytes, he must shoulder the blame for not leading the transformation of the party from being a poor caricature, albeit a successful one, of the former ruling party, KANU. In this he has been emulated by the wily William Ruto (URP), the hapless Musalia Mudavadi (UDF), Martha Karua (NARC-K), the professorial James Ole Kiyiapi (RBK) and the comical-but-devastating Kalembe Ndile (TIP). It seems that only TNA has an effective management in place. There is room for doubt though; when its secretary general pronounces that he is yet to design the nomination ballot paper and that only he (and his design team will do so), it reminds one of the high-handed KANU ways Kenyans had hoped were consigned to the dustbin of political history.

We have deliberately placed political parties at the centre of political discourse in this country and for better or worse, we have allowed these parties not to be ideologically-driven, but leader-driven. If we wish to avoid the conflagrations of 2007 and 2008, to which poorly managed nominations exercises contributed, then all the tens of thousands of Kenyans who have signed up to become members of political parties must take their responsibilities as members of those parties seriously. Seriousness of intent can only be demonstrated by the payment of subscription fees and the full participation in party activities. In 2007, there were party delegates for hire. In 2013, it is presumed because there are electronic databases of party members, this phenomenon has seen its last. It is the only way that nominations exercises will be as free and fair as possible. When the nominations are overseen by self-interested politicians, as in the case of ODM/CORD, bloodshed is to be expected.

No comments:

Some bosses lead, some bosses blame

Bosses make great CX a central part of strategy and mission. Bosses set standards at the top of organizations. Bosses recruit, train, and de...