By LUKOYE ATWOLI
Sunday Nation 09 August 2009, Page 33
Two weeks ago, President Mwai Kibaki visited Nyanza Province accompanied by Prime Minister Raila Odinga. A lot of what transpired during this tour was lost in the hype over the new-found rapprochement between the erstwhile foes, and much of the subsequent discussion has focused on this issue.
Lost in the cacophony was the very significant statement made by the President in an attempt to crystallise the problem with our country. In his considered opinion, the problem with Kenya could be linked directly to the relationship between “our two communities”.
At a public rally in Ugenya, he declared: “Each time we have worked together, Kenya has done well. And every time our two communities have fallen apart, Kenya has suffered.” The equanimity with which this statement was received seems to indicate that most Kenyan leaders consider it a truism not worth debating.
It seems we all agree that the history of this nation is largely the story of the relationship between the Kikuyu and the Luo, and that other tribes have only played supporting roles in the entire saga.
While exhorting the local community to help the nation’s leadership end tribalism, the President went ahead and asked them to work with “his community” for the betterment of the nation. The fact that nobody noticed any contradiction in these statements serves only to indicate that ours is still a nation in which the leadership has nothing to fear, no matter what they say or do in public.
These remarks constitute a massive slide back to our colonial past where no Kenyan had any identity beyond his or her tribe, and the sins of the leaders would be visited on their tribesmates across the breadth of the country.
Whatever imperialist structures were left behind were inherited lock, stock and barrel by the independence leaders, most of whom we can, with hindsight, characterise as being perfect examples of spectacular leadership failure.
Manifestly, our top leadership is still labouring under the same tribal millstones their forebears had to deal with, while the youth remain rudderless because they were brought up on a staple of lies about a united nation called Kenya where one is judged by the “content of his character” and not the surname of his paternal grandfather!
The view that the destiny of this country depends on the relationship between the two tribes further perpetuates the fallacy that the President and Prime Minister are indeed anointed leaders of their tribes, and locks the door on any idea of leadership change in their communities and, by extension, in Kenya.
It also indicates a disdain for the other tribes that make up our diverse nation, insinuating that their roles in the formation of the independent republic were at best peripheral. The President has, with this statement, only added fuel to the fire of the “Tribe Kenya” initiative which refuses to entrust data on tribe to a cabal that is determined to use this information for political deal-making and not for any other useful purpose.
For the avoidance of doubt, it must be clarified that the President is not alone in proclaiming this tribal philosophy. He joins the infamous company of politicians who keep calling for alliances between their tribes and others for purposes of winning political contests.
Terms like the Western Alliance, Kamatusa, Gema and more recently the KK (Kikuyu-Kalenjin) alliance have become such permanent fixtures in our political lexicon that nobody raises an eyebrow when they are mentioned.
It must be stated for posterity that Kenya is bigger than any single individual, and that the nation is greater than the sum of its tribes. Assertions of tribal collaboration and affinity are therefore inimical to the national interest, and only go to entrench some of the poison that has been responsible for most violent confrontations in this country.
As a matter of fact, the post-election conflagration that these leaders are deigning to gloss over with their camaraderie was partly triggered by the perception that the election was primarily about tribes rather than parties or even individuals.
The problem with Kenya has nothing to do with any two tribes failing to work together, but everything to do with our political leadership taking advantage of our ethnic identity to ride roughshod over the national interest in the name of fighting for “our community”.
Our national leaders will do well to focus on true national reconciliation and enable an enlightened debate on Kenyan nationhood.
Without an attitude change where each individual Kenyan is considered important in his or her own right, and not as a member of some tribe, the existence of this country as a cohesive entity in the next few decades is in serious doubt.
Dr Lukoye Atwoli is a consultant psychiatrist and lecturer at Moi University’s School of Medicine, www.lukoyeatwoli.com
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Constitution: Furore over Kadhi Courts much ado about nothing
By Lukoye Atwoli
Sunday Nation 02 August 2009, Page 46
This past week Christian clerics of all shades and descriptions have been falling all over themselves pontificating against the inclusion of Kadhis' courts in the constitution of Kenya. The clerics are also arguing against the decision by the Committee of Experts to exclude these courts from the list of contentious issues and would like the debate to be reopened.
The uproar from these Christian religious leaders has not come as a surprise to those who have keenly followed the events surrounding this country's repeated attempts at constitutional review.
These leaders always emerge during critical periods to vociferously oppose having the Muslim courts entrenched in the constitution. As a matter of fact the Wako draft was rejected at the 2005 referendum partly because of these Christian clerics' protests.
These clerics know full well that their loud opposition to the Muslim courts in the constitution will result in equally forceful arguments in favour of the courts from Muslim clerics and faithful all over the country. They know in fact that arguing against these courts that are already provided for in the current law is tantamount to campaigning against a new constitution.
It is, therefore, not such a wild jump of logic to suppose that these clerics have no interest in a new constitution and are, therefore, using the Kadhis' courts as an excuse to cause such a furore that the whole process is rendered ineffectual. If this is true, then these Christian religious leaders must be exposed as one of the major stumbling blocks to achieving a new constitutional dispensation in our lifetime.
That being the case, they must be told in no uncertain terms that despite the assertion that the majority of Kenyans are identified as ``Christian'', most are in reality nominal Christians who cannot identify with the kind of fundamentalist posturing being exhibited by these pastors and bishops.
It is clear to most thinking Kenyans that despite their existence in our legal justice system for decades, Kadhis' courts have not been demonstrated to cause any harm to non-Muslims as they go about their day-to-day business. Nobody has yet been subjected to Sharia law in this country against his will; nor has anyone shown that application of the Kadhi court system has resulted in any harm to those that do not submit to it.
Assertions that Kadhis' courts constitute a misuse of taxpayers' money on one religion do not hold water, since Muslims are not ``one religion''; they are Kenyans with the same rights as all others. If they perceive the current laws to be inadequate as far as their personal matters are concerned, they have a right to use their own religious law to resolve them.
Quite to the contrary, it can be amply demonstrated that use of Kadhis' courts for personal law and religious matters serves to reduce the strain on the rest of the judicial system, thus saving the taxpayer a lot of money that would have otherwise been wasted on delays and other wastages in our courts.
Another argument being advanced is that the presence of Kadhis' courts in the constitution implies that Islam is the only recognised religion in the country.
This argument is fallacious since it assumes that the constitution controls every single function in the life of a citizen.
Fallacious
Ideally, the constitution only mentions certain specific issues on the premise that not doing so would result in possible injustice to segments of society. Not providing for Kadhis' courts would be putting Muslims at a disadvantage in matters of personal law.
Further, establishment of a state religion cannot be a tacit affair, and must be explicitly stated both in government policy and in the basic law of the land.
Christian clerics are called upon to play a major role in achieving a just and cohesive society, and fighting the Kadhis' courts goes against this noble ideal.
Any misgivings about the manner of implementation of these courts in the new constitution can be more soberly debated without the emotive rhetoric being currently employed.
As it is, the dispute is already generating a lot of unnecessary heat with Muslim clerics organising themselves to respond forcefully to the perceived onslaught on their faith. This is tantamount to adding fuel to an already raging fire, and must be contained at all costs.
The clamour for a new constitution will only end when we agree on a process of give and take, given that these zero-sum games only end up perpetuating the status quo.
If everyone were to predicate their acceptance or rejection of a new constitution on a single clause, Kenyans would do much better waiting for Godot than anticipating a new constitution.
Dr Lukoye Atwoli is a consultant psychiatrist and lecturer at Moi University's School of Medicine www.lukoyeatwoli.com
Sunday Nation 02 August 2009, Page 46
This past week Christian clerics of all shades and descriptions have been falling all over themselves pontificating against the inclusion of Kadhis' courts in the constitution of Kenya. The clerics are also arguing against the decision by the Committee of Experts to exclude these courts from the list of contentious issues and would like the debate to be reopened.
The uproar from these Christian religious leaders has not come as a surprise to those who have keenly followed the events surrounding this country's repeated attempts at constitutional review.
These leaders always emerge during critical periods to vociferously oppose having the Muslim courts entrenched in the constitution. As a matter of fact the Wako draft was rejected at the 2005 referendum partly because of these Christian clerics' protests.
These clerics know full well that their loud opposition to the Muslim courts in the constitution will result in equally forceful arguments in favour of the courts from Muslim clerics and faithful all over the country. They know in fact that arguing against these courts that are already provided for in the current law is tantamount to campaigning against a new constitution.
It is, therefore, not such a wild jump of logic to suppose that these clerics have no interest in a new constitution and are, therefore, using the Kadhis' courts as an excuse to cause such a furore that the whole process is rendered ineffectual. If this is true, then these Christian religious leaders must be exposed as one of the major stumbling blocks to achieving a new constitutional dispensation in our lifetime.
That being the case, they must be told in no uncertain terms that despite the assertion that the majority of Kenyans are identified as ``Christian'', most are in reality nominal Christians who cannot identify with the kind of fundamentalist posturing being exhibited by these pastors and bishops.
It is clear to most thinking Kenyans that despite their existence in our legal justice system for decades, Kadhis' courts have not been demonstrated to cause any harm to non-Muslims as they go about their day-to-day business. Nobody has yet been subjected to Sharia law in this country against his will; nor has anyone shown that application of the Kadhi court system has resulted in any harm to those that do not submit to it.
Assertions that Kadhis' courts constitute a misuse of taxpayers' money on one religion do not hold water, since Muslims are not ``one religion''; they are Kenyans with the same rights as all others. If they perceive the current laws to be inadequate as far as their personal matters are concerned, they have a right to use their own religious law to resolve them.
Quite to the contrary, it can be amply demonstrated that use of Kadhis' courts for personal law and religious matters serves to reduce the strain on the rest of the judicial system, thus saving the taxpayer a lot of money that would have otherwise been wasted on delays and other wastages in our courts.
Another argument being advanced is that the presence of Kadhis' courts in the constitution implies that Islam is the only recognised religion in the country.
This argument is fallacious since it assumes that the constitution controls every single function in the life of a citizen.
Fallacious
Ideally, the constitution only mentions certain specific issues on the premise that not doing so would result in possible injustice to segments of society. Not providing for Kadhis' courts would be putting Muslims at a disadvantage in matters of personal law.
Further, establishment of a state religion cannot be a tacit affair, and must be explicitly stated both in government policy and in the basic law of the land.
Christian clerics are called upon to play a major role in achieving a just and cohesive society, and fighting the Kadhis' courts goes against this noble ideal.
Any misgivings about the manner of implementation of these courts in the new constitution can be more soberly debated without the emotive rhetoric being currently employed.
As it is, the dispute is already generating a lot of unnecessary heat with Muslim clerics organising themselves to respond forcefully to the perceived onslaught on their faith. This is tantamount to adding fuel to an already raging fire, and must be contained at all costs.
The clamour for a new constitution will only end when we agree on a process of give and take, given that these zero-sum games only end up perpetuating the status quo.
If everyone were to predicate their acceptance or rejection of a new constitution on a single clause, Kenyans would do much better waiting for Godot than anticipating a new constitution.
Dr Lukoye Atwoli is a consultant psychiatrist and lecturer at Moi University's School of Medicine www.lukoyeatwoli.com
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Prosecute violence suspects to fullest extent of the law
By Lukoye Atwoli
Sunday Nation 26 July 2009, Page 33
There have been reports in the media that communities in areas that bore the brunt of post-election violence are getting restless and that threats of violence are re-emerging due to the wrangling over how to treat perpetrators of the violence.
It is being reported that residents of Eldoret and other parts of the Rift Valley are once again threatening to unleash violence on members of other communities as the impasse persists.
It is instructive to note that these reports are coming from closely guarded sources, and there does not seem to be any public acknowledgement of the existence of these threats.
In truth, the basis for these reports is rumour and hearsay and, barring any evidence to the contrary, they must be received with a healthy dose of salt.
Politicians have perfected the art of holding the country at ransom with threats of violence if they are held to account for their role in the post-election violence, and the media and "research institutions" which are really only briefcase NGOs seeking relevance are squarely falling into this trap.
Highlighting such reports that are based on nothing but conjecture and innuendo serves only to raise temperatures more than any threats that may actually have been made.
It is a fact that ethnic tensions have been part and parcel of life in most of Kenya since independence and, because nothing has been done to address this, they tend to erupt into violence at the slightest provocation.
Provocation
Another fact of existence in this country is that politicians are made or broken on the basis of tribal considerations, and not on the party or platform they represent. Indeed for as long as anyone can remember, politicians have been making threats of unleashing their supporters' wrath on their opponents whenever they feel threatened.
It should, therefore, come as no surprise when the same politicians continue threatening ethnic fire and brimstone if anyone tries to investigate their role in the post-election violence. What is surprising is that the otherwise enlightened media and "civil society" are taking up this message as though it is gospel truth, and propagating it as the findings from a "scientific" process.
The truth of the matter is that, in bars and marketplaces all over the country, the language people speak is often derogatory concerning other tribes, and it is peppered with violent imagery and visions of gore and bloodshed.
A victim mentality and ideas of "marginalisation" pervade every corner of the republic and this has, in turn, given rise to a sense of entitlement that borders on the juvenile.
Talk has always been rife of "foreigners" who are taking up all "our" resources, and this cannot be presented as a new phenomenon linked exclusively to the fate of the masterminds of the post-election violence.
Threatening politicians with fresh outbreaks of ethnic animosity hoping to induce them to tone down their rhetoric is bound to be counterproductive, for our politicians have demonstrated a singular insularity as they pursue their own cherished goals.
A threat such as The Hague or even a local tribunal would, therefore, be expected to bring out the worst in them, and telling them that their "people" are getting restless only serves to further inflate their egos and vindicate their already overblown sense of personal invulnerability.
The role of civil society and a patriotic media should be to expose insidious threats to our nationhood and even identify possible ways to extirpate them before they metastasise beyond our ability to handle them.
It is almost accepted beyond reasonable doubt that our current crop of politicians poses the greatest threat to the future of this nation, and we must make this amply clear to any among us who still has questions about this. It is, therefore, the height of folly to amplify the cacophony being made by politicians and even repackage it as a truth worth discussing when, in actual fact, it is a tissue of lies and self-serving nonsense.
The best way of dealing with these fellows would be to call their bluff and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law, and then see who would remember them long enough to cause turmoil on their behalf.
If this is done it is in fact conceivable that the talk of retaliatory violence will cease, for the warlords are the real architects of such ideas. The common citizen is too busy trying to eke out an honest living when he is not suffering the ravages of hunger, disease water shortage or some other calamity.
The fate of the ethno-political warlords cannot, and must not, be linked to the future of our country as a colourfully diverse but cohesive cosmopolitan polity.
Lukoye Atwoli is a consultant psychiatrist and lecturer at Moi University's School of Medicine www.lukoyeatwoli.com
Sunday Nation 26 July 2009, Page 33
There have been reports in the media that communities in areas that bore the brunt of post-election violence are getting restless and that threats of violence are re-emerging due to the wrangling over how to treat perpetrators of the violence.
It is being reported that residents of Eldoret and other parts of the Rift Valley are once again threatening to unleash violence on members of other communities as the impasse persists.
It is instructive to note that these reports are coming from closely guarded sources, and there does not seem to be any public acknowledgement of the existence of these threats.
In truth, the basis for these reports is rumour and hearsay and, barring any evidence to the contrary, they must be received with a healthy dose of salt.
Politicians have perfected the art of holding the country at ransom with threats of violence if they are held to account for their role in the post-election violence, and the media and "research institutions" which are really only briefcase NGOs seeking relevance are squarely falling into this trap.
Highlighting such reports that are based on nothing but conjecture and innuendo serves only to raise temperatures more than any threats that may actually have been made.
It is a fact that ethnic tensions have been part and parcel of life in most of Kenya since independence and, because nothing has been done to address this, they tend to erupt into violence at the slightest provocation.
Provocation
Another fact of existence in this country is that politicians are made or broken on the basis of tribal considerations, and not on the party or platform they represent. Indeed for as long as anyone can remember, politicians have been making threats of unleashing their supporters' wrath on their opponents whenever they feel threatened.
It should, therefore, come as no surprise when the same politicians continue threatening ethnic fire and brimstone if anyone tries to investigate their role in the post-election violence. What is surprising is that the otherwise enlightened media and "civil society" are taking up this message as though it is gospel truth, and propagating it as the findings from a "scientific" process.
The truth of the matter is that, in bars and marketplaces all over the country, the language people speak is often derogatory concerning other tribes, and it is peppered with violent imagery and visions of gore and bloodshed.
A victim mentality and ideas of "marginalisation" pervade every corner of the republic and this has, in turn, given rise to a sense of entitlement that borders on the juvenile.
Talk has always been rife of "foreigners" who are taking up all "our" resources, and this cannot be presented as a new phenomenon linked exclusively to the fate of the masterminds of the post-election violence.
Threatening politicians with fresh outbreaks of ethnic animosity hoping to induce them to tone down their rhetoric is bound to be counterproductive, for our politicians have demonstrated a singular insularity as they pursue their own cherished goals.
A threat such as The Hague or even a local tribunal would, therefore, be expected to bring out the worst in them, and telling them that their "people" are getting restless only serves to further inflate their egos and vindicate their already overblown sense of personal invulnerability.
The role of civil society and a patriotic media should be to expose insidious threats to our nationhood and even identify possible ways to extirpate them before they metastasise beyond our ability to handle them.
It is almost accepted beyond reasonable doubt that our current crop of politicians poses the greatest threat to the future of this nation, and we must make this amply clear to any among us who still has questions about this. It is, therefore, the height of folly to amplify the cacophony being made by politicians and even repackage it as a truth worth discussing when, in actual fact, it is a tissue of lies and self-serving nonsense.
The best way of dealing with these fellows would be to call their bluff and prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law, and then see who would remember them long enough to cause turmoil on their behalf.
If this is done it is in fact conceivable that the talk of retaliatory violence will cease, for the warlords are the real architects of such ideas. The common citizen is too busy trying to eke out an honest living when he is not suffering the ravages of hunger, disease water shortage or some other calamity.
The fate of the ethno-political warlords cannot, and must not, be linked to the future of our country as a colourfully diverse but cohesive cosmopolitan polity.
Lukoye Atwoli is a consultant psychiatrist and lecturer at Moi University's School of Medicine www.lukoyeatwoli.com
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Time to Resolve Impasse in the Police Force
By Lukoye Atwoli
Sunday Nation 19 July 2009, Page 38
The recent spate of violent crime, including car-jackings and abductions, has been so audacious that even the high and mighty have not been spared.
Cabinet ministers, MPs and ordinary citizens have been targeted almost equally, resulting in the ubiquitous protests from the political class about "rising insecurity" and the need to deal with the menace.
Prior to this crime surge, the police force had been under sustained attack from the human rights lobby over extrajudicial killings. A special rapporteur of the United Nations was even brought in to lend more weight to the campaign, and he recommended an overhaul of the leadership of the police and the establishment of a police oversight mechanism.
To spice things up some more, the government is contemplating merging the two competing police formations the regular police and the administration police (AP).
A team has been going round the country collecting views from Kenyans concerning this issue, and it is clear that a lot of organisation has gone into lobbying for one side of the debate or the other. During some hearings, crowds have emerged with banners supporting one point of view as opposed to another.
This passionate discourse has even drawn senior leaders of the two competing groups, with the regular police boss seeming convinced that merging the two forces will enhance efficiency and reduce conflicts over chain of command, while the AP commandant holds a position diametrically opposed to this.
The rivalry between the two forces has resulted in serious incidents pitting regular police officers against their AP counterparts with disastrous consequences.
The clashes have taken place all over the country, and the aftermath has involved embarrassing scenes of senior officers accusing each other of masterminding crime and covering up investigations.
Obvious in all this is the fact that politicians have not wasted time taking sides in the argument. Those with axes to grind against the police commissioner have gone to town with demands that he steps aside, and some civil society groups have even identified individual officers for pillorying. In the usual Kenyan fashion, it is easy to see which side of the political chasm supports which force, although opinions become muddled when it comes to specifics including whether the two forces should be merged or not.
It may be powerfully argued that it is the involvement of politicians in the affairs of law enforcement that has resulted in the inertia in the police forces, and caused an escalation of the crime wave in various parts of the country.
Perceived political patronage has resulted in a standoff that could have been easily resolved through an administrative audit of the functions of the two police formations resulting in a determination on whether they are superfluous or complementary.
Instead, the country has been stattreated to the spectacle of two parallel police forces squaring it out in the glare of media publicity while the ranks of the criminal class continue to swell unabated.
Perhaps the most poignant reminder of the failure of police functions lies in the fact that today no politician, however junior in the scheme of things, can be arrested for a crime without causing partisan murmurs.
Last week, one politician loudly proclaimed at a public rally that Kenya "cannot be considered to be a failed state" even in the wildest imagination.
Well, to refresh his imagination, one of the key indicators of state failure is loss of control over large swathes of territory and state surrender of its monopoly of violence.
The apparent impotence of our police force in the face of widespread criminal activity leaves no doubt in our minds about who controls the instruments of violence in this country.
Instead of enforcing the law equally and without fear or favour as they are sworn to do, our police officers now have to look over their shoulders every time they arrest an offender, just in case he belongs to an opposing police formation or is in the pay of some political supremo.
The fact that these warlords can stop implementation of the law by threatening violence and nothing is done to chastise them just goes to further illustrate the extent of state failure in Somalia.
In the suburbs of Nairobi and other big towns across the country, there is emerging the concept of "neighbourhood watch", which is just a posh name for vigilante formations.
Ethnic militias complete the picture in the rural areas and urban slums and, unless something is done urgently, our slide to Somaliesque state failure is reaching a point of no state return.
To avoid this steady advance to anarchy, it is incumbent upon the government to sort out the mess in the police forces before it completely loses the ability to do so.
Dr Lukoye Atwoli is a consultant psychiatrist and lecturer at Moi University's School of Medicine www.lukoyeatwoli.com
Sunday Nation 19 July 2009, Page 38
The recent spate of violent crime, including car-jackings and abductions, has been so audacious that even the high and mighty have not been spared.
Cabinet ministers, MPs and ordinary citizens have been targeted almost equally, resulting in the ubiquitous protests from the political class about "rising insecurity" and the need to deal with the menace.
Prior to this crime surge, the police force had been under sustained attack from the human rights lobby over extrajudicial killings. A special rapporteur of the United Nations was even brought in to lend more weight to the campaign, and he recommended an overhaul of the leadership of the police and the establishment of a police oversight mechanism.
To spice things up some more, the government is contemplating merging the two competing police formations the regular police and the administration police (AP).
A team has been going round the country collecting views from Kenyans concerning this issue, and it is clear that a lot of organisation has gone into lobbying for one side of the debate or the other. During some hearings, crowds have emerged with banners supporting one point of view as opposed to another.
This passionate discourse has even drawn senior leaders of the two competing groups, with the regular police boss seeming convinced that merging the two forces will enhance efficiency and reduce conflicts over chain of command, while the AP commandant holds a position diametrically opposed to this.
The rivalry between the two forces has resulted in serious incidents pitting regular police officers against their AP counterparts with disastrous consequences.
The clashes have taken place all over the country, and the aftermath has involved embarrassing scenes of senior officers accusing each other of masterminding crime and covering up investigations.
Obvious in all this is the fact that politicians have not wasted time taking sides in the argument. Those with axes to grind against the police commissioner have gone to town with demands that he steps aside, and some civil society groups have even identified individual officers for pillorying. In the usual Kenyan fashion, it is easy to see which side of the political chasm supports which force, although opinions become muddled when it comes to specifics including whether the two forces should be merged or not.
It may be powerfully argued that it is the involvement of politicians in the affairs of law enforcement that has resulted in the inertia in the police forces, and caused an escalation of the crime wave in various parts of the country.
Perceived political patronage has resulted in a standoff that could have been easily resolved through an administrative audit of the functions of the two police formations resulting in a determination on whether they are superfluous or complementary.
Instead, the country has been stattreated to the spectacle of two parallel police forces squaring it out in the glare of media publicity while the ranks of the criminal class continue to swell unabated.
Perhaps the most poignant reminder of the failure of police functions lies in the fact that today no politician, however junior in the scheme of things, can be arrested for a crime without causing partisan murmurs.
Last week, one politician loudly proclaimed at a public rally that Kenya "cannot be considered to be a failed state" even in the wildest imagination.
Well, to refresh his imagination, one of the key indicators of state failure is loss of control over large swathes of territory and state surrender of its monopoly of violence.
The apparent impotence of our police force in the face of widespread criminal activity leaves no doubt in our minds about who controls the instruments of violence in this country.
Instead of enforcing the law equally and without fear or favour as they are sworn to do, our police officers now have to look over their shoulders every time they arrest an offender, just in case he belongs to an opposing police formation or is in the pay of some political supremo.
The fact that these warlords can stop implementation of the law by threatening violence and nothing is done to chastise them just goes to further illustrate the extent of state failure in Somalia.
In the suburbs of Nairobi and other big towns across the country, there is emerging the concept of "neighbourhood watch", which is just a posh name for vigilante formations.
Ethnic militias complete the picture in the rural areas and urban slums and, unless something is done urgently, our slide to Somaliesque state failure is reaching a point of no state return.
To avoid this steady advance to anarchy, it is incumbent upon the government to sort out the mess in the police forces before it completely loses the ability to do so.
Dr Lukoye Atwoli is a consultant psychiatrist and lecturer at Moi University's School of Medicine www.lukoyeatwoli.com
Monday, July 13, 2009
The ball is now in the ICC’s court
By Lukoye Atwoli
(Edited version published Sunday Nation 12 July 2009, page 31)
Until a few days ago, the Kenya government had created a perception that the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor had, with the agreement of Kofi Annan, granted the Kenya government an extension as they seek to set up a local tribunal to try the perpetrators of Post-Election Violence. The minister for Justice, National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs had even declared on National TV that the government “is no longer bound by the provisions of the Waki Report”.
After Kofi Annan delivered the sucker punch with a mid-week declaration that the infamous Waki envelope had been handed over to the ICC, politicians have been struggling to come up with a cogent response. The height of irony is that so much time and energy had been spent discussing the operationalisaton of the Waki report, that the government’s declaration that the report would just be trashed like several others before it ran counter to all logical reasoning.
The Waki proposals were made within the ethno-political context of Kenya as it was last year and continues to be today. The situation is such that some of the perpetrators occupy positions at the very pinnacle of power in this country, and it would be difficult to prosecute them without requiring a reconstitution of government or a change of the law to remove real and imagined immunities from these politicians.
The Waki team must have realized that just making recommendations and leaving them to the Principals and their minions to implement would have resulted in more of the same inertia that met the production of numerous other Commission Reports since independence.
It was in recognition of this reality that the team wisely recommended that if the government demonstrates unwillingness or inability to move forward with a local tribunal, the ICC at The Hague would automatically be involved. The chief mediator, Kofi Annan, was given the simple role of custodian of the envelope with the perpetrators’ names until the ICC provisions kicked in.
Kenyan politicians, in their wily fashion, somehow managed to expand Kofi Annan’s role by giving him the mandate to vary the Waki deadlines and decide for himself when to hand over the envelope to the ICC. Indeed until a few days ago the warlords were convinced that they had won a major victory over those that continue to demand justice for the crimes committed against the nation and the people of Kenya. As double insurance, the government had even decided to go over Kofi Annan’s head to the ultimate recipient, Mr. Luis Moreno-Ocampo at the ICC.
The belief by the politicians that they had been granted an extension by the ICC, and the resultant chest-thumping about ‘no longer being bound by the provisions of the Waki report’ are indications of just what sort of nonsense to expect if we leave the process to our government and the political class . The Waki report did not envisage any role for the ICC prosecutor except to receive the envelope and move on from there on the assumption that the Kenya government had failed to prosecute the perpetrators.
By handing over the envelope to the ICC, Kofi Annan has tacitly indicated that he has lost faith in the ability of the government to form a credible local tribunal, and in belatedly following Waki’s prescription, he has left the matter in the hands of the ICC prosecutor.
Outside of the political arena in this country, everyone agrees that crimes of a magnitude that falls within the jurisdiction of the ICC were committed after the last general election. Almost everyone agrees that our legal justice system as currently constituted lacks the capacity to successfully try these crimes, and the evidence abounds in the hundreds of thousands of pending cases involving petty crimes littering our corridors of justice.
Insisting on a local tribunal or other judicial processes is therefore a transparent attempt to give the political class an opportunity to cleanse themselves by influencing the process to come up with findings favorable to them. Instructively, many politicians have even dismissed the local tribunal as an arena for witch-hunts and ‘fixing’ political opponents.
The move by Kofi Annan and his team is therefore commendable, though late in coming, and the ball now shifts to Moreno-Ocampo and the ICC. It is unacceptable that months after the Waki team examined the evidence and made valid recommendations, the implementation process remains mired in political grandstanding and intrigue.
The top potentates, including the so-called principals, must not rest easy thinking that Kenyans have forgiven them or forgotten the suffering they went through last year. The buck stops with them, and even if it takes a hundred years, the truth about the nonsensical killing spree we endured last year shall finally be laid bare.
(Edited version published Sunday Nation 12 July 2009, page 31)
Until a few days ago, the Kenya government had created a perception that the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor had, with the agreement of Kofi Annan, granted the Kenya government an extension as they seek to set up a local tribunal to try the perpetrators of Post-Election Violence. The minister for Justice, National Cohesion and Constitutional Affairs had even declared on National TV that the government “is no longer bound by the provisions of the Waki Report”.
After Kofi Annan delivered the sucker punch with a mid-week declaration that the infamous Waki envelope had been handed over to the ICC, politicians have been struggling to come up with a cogent response. The height of irony is that so much time and energy had been spent discussing the operationalisaton of the Waki report, that the government’s declaration that the report would just be trashed like several others before it ran counter to all logical reasoning.
The Waki proposals were made within the ethno-political context of Kenya as it was last year and continues to be today. The situation is such that some of the perpetrators occupy positions at the very pinnacle of power in this country, and it would be difficult to prosecute them without requiring a reconstitution of government or a change of the law to remove real and imagined immunities from these politicians.
The Waki team must have realized that just making recommendations and leaving them to the Principals and their minions to implement would have resulted in more of the same inertia that met the production of numerous other Commission Reports since independence.
It was in recognition of this reality that the team wisely recommended that if the government demonstrates unwillingness or inability to move forward with a local tribunal, the ICC at The Hague would automatically be involved. The chief mediator, Kofi Annan, was given the simple role of custodian of the envelope with the perpetrators’ names until the ICC provisions kicked in.
Kenyan politicians, in their wily fashion, somehow managed to expand Kofi Annan’s role by giving him the mandate to vary the Waki deadlines and decide for himself when to hand over the envelope to the ICC. Indeed until a few days ago the warlords were convinced that they had won a major victory over those that continue to demand justice for the crimes committed against the nation and the people of Kenya. As double insurance, the government had even decided to go over Kofi Annan’s head to the ultimate recipient, Mr. Luis Moreno-Ocampo at the ICC.
The belief by the politicians that they had been granted an extension by the ICC, and the resultant chest-thumping about ‘no longer being bound by the provisions of the Waki report’ are indications of just what sort of nonsense to expect if we leave the process to our government and the political class . The Waki report did not envisage any role for the ICC prosecutor except to receive the envelope and move on from there on the assumption that the Kenya government had failed to prosecute the perpetrators.
By handing over the envelope to the ICC, Kofi Annan has tacitly indicated that he has lost faith in the ability of the government to form a credible local tribunal, and in belatedly following Waki’s prescription, he has left the matter in the hands of the ICC prosecutor.
Outside of the political arena in this country, everyone agrees that crimes of a magnitude that falls within the jurisdiction of the ICC were committed after the last general election. Almost everyone agrees that our legal justice system as currently constituted lacks the capacity to successfully try these crimes, and the evidence abounds in the hundreds of thousands of pending cases involving petty crimes littering our corridors of justice.
Insisting on a local tribunal or other judicial processes is therefore a transparent attempt to give the political class an opportunity to cleanse themselves by influencing the process to come up with findings favorable to them. Instructively, many politicians have even dismissed the local tribunal as an arena for witch-hunts and ‘fixing’ political opponents.
The move by Kofi Annan and his team is therefore commendable, though late in coming, and the ball now shifts to Moreno-Ocampo and the ICC. It is unacceptable that months after the Waki team examined the evidence and made valid recommendations, the implementation process remains mired in political grandstanding and intrigue.
The top potentates, including the so-called principals, must not rest easy thinking that Kenyans have forgiven them or forgotten the suffering they went through last year. The buck stops with them, and even if it takes a hundred years, the truth about the nonsensical killing spree we endured last year shall finally be laid bare.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)