Kenyans need to take some time and examine what happened at Naivasha. Before they left for the retreat, ODM gave Kenyans the impression that they were in favor of a parliamentary form of governance. PNU remained consistent in rooting for a presidential system. Within a couple of days however, a consensus had been reached: ODM was now in favor of a "pure" presidential system. Apparently, they had had a change of heart in order to ensure that we got a new constitution. PNU had threatened to walk out unless their demands were met. Again this was consistent with a "normal PNU" reaction. But while wananchi were busy celebrating, the MPs got busy and reversed all the gains that a "pure presidential system" should offer. At the forefront of these reversals were PNU MPs, who took advantage at every opportunity to threaten to walk out. Since this is not the first time this has happened, the question has to be raised: Why? (Article 1 and Article 2)

First, the MPs weakened the separation between the executive and parliament by allowing the head of state to pick half his cabinet from parliamentarians, contrary to the earlier agreement. This act increases further the number of MPs because those appointed to cabinet have to resign so that new MPs are elected. Then they attempted to increase regional governments from 18 to 33, after first opposing devolution. They are always opposed to devolution. This is why the committee was forced to settle for counties. Then there is the contentious issue of "one man one vote": basically they want more parliamentary seats, because, they are many. The irony which seems lost to them, of course, is that the large numbers (including more MPs) come at the expense of fellow Kenyans: there are many Kenyan communities which have endured marginalization since independence. The regions largely represented by PNU, on the other hand, benefitted from the first 15 years of an African Presidency; they benefitted developmentally in many ways: Article . (Similarly, certain branches of the Kalenjin community benefitted from Moi's years in the presidency.) How does this partisan approach to development in Kenya's national politics help the nation?

When privileged members of a community that has patronized government resources for many years stand in the path of better governance for the whole country, it is surely a self-serving act. What if other communities insisted that they should also get the kinds of benefits that have spurred their faster development and stabilized their population? (In fact, this is the mentality behind the "It is our time to eat" attitude held by Kenyans whenever someone from their community acquires a position in high office.) Could the country afford it? There is no denying that favorable factors dating from the independence years have played a significant role in shaping the fortunes of Central Kenya. In Michela Wrong's book, It's our Turn to Eat, David Ndii, a well respected economist from the region affirms that, relatively speaking, the Kikuyu are not marginalized: "If you look at any indicators-health, education, access to water, access to electricity- the Kikuyu always come on top." He further denies the notion that Central Kenya contributes most to the economy: "When you examine the data, it turns out to be bullshit. The most productive people in Kenya are pastoralists." It is possible that because the central region's contribution to the economy is mainly from cash crops (which bring in foreign exchange), the contributions of other communities, most of which are consumed locally, have somehow been devalued.

So, when it comes to national issues, this hardliner self-centered attitude has come to define the political elite of Central Kenya; the average Kenyan, who is quick to draw direct connections between the political elite of the Kikuyu community and the regular Kikuyu citizen, has consequently come to view the Kikuyu as a "bully" tribe. It doesn't help matters that the average Kikuyu mwananchi often naively expresses support for the agendas put forward by the leaders from his/ her ethnic group. Now, it has to be said that the same is true for the average Luo, Kalenjin etc mwananchi. This unquestioning agreement with the "tribe's leaders" is an unfortunate Kenyan 'syndrome'. It has the gravest repercussions when the ethnic group in question is relatively large and has great political, military, religious, or economic clout regionally or nationally. For proof of this statement, simply take a look at the way politics plays out all over Kenya. This precise attitude has been behind the many eruptions of violence all over Kenya since the state gained her 'independence' in 1963.

Because of the way Kenya has been governed since independence, there are many ethnicities who now admit openly that they were better off under colonial rule. The Maasai, for example, after watching their herds die needlessly year in and year out because of the now common droughts openly declare that they were better off when the British governed: the British ensured that their herds had water, even during drought conditions. Many communities in independent Kenya are similarly dehumanized by malnutrition, disease, ignorance and poverty. But the leaders of Central, who happen to be enjoying their political ascendance at the moment, see only the suffering of the Kikuyu. Government statistics show that some Kenyan regions have been declining in population, while Central Kenya's initial 20% of Kenya's population has been increasing steadily, with a significant spill over into the Rift Valley (the focus of the post-election violence) and other parts of the country. Note that I am not claiming that all Central Kenyans are well off and thriving. Every Kenyan knows Central Kenya to also be home to brutalizing poverty. However, when you look at the health and other developmental indicators of the country's various regions, Central Kenyans are, on average, better off. The solution is not to marginalize Central Kenyans and 'uplift' people from other regions. Rather, the solution is to develop and maintain a just and balanced national agenda so as to bring all the people of Kenya to a developmental par. This agenda should include all regions of Kenya. However, what is the likelihood that such an agenda would come into existence when it is not even on the minds of those at the top of the Kenyan pyramid? Is it a surprise that many Kenyans dream of some form of federalism as the only viable solution? When we need PNU to be true leaders and show us the way forward, where are they?

One would expect PNU MPs, the leaders of a relatively successful region of the country, to be more magnanimous, especially when putting together a constitution for posterity. After all, many Kenyans have been killed or brutalised in diverse ways simply for expressing views contrary to those of the executive. Instead of recognizing their pivotal/ privileged status however, this ruling class uses its numerical strength and political clout to bully the country into accepting an inferior document that doesn't differ significantly from the current one. The politicians that now dominate PNU may have been at the forefront of agitating for better governance during the Moi years, but in retrospect, it seems that this was only because power was not in their hands. PNU should be at the forefront of getting Kenya the kind of constitution that can withstand the whims of any dictator. Why would they condemn the country to the risk of perpetual misgovernance for another half century? Article .

The leadership culture since independence has been predatory: the weak are shoved aside as the moneyed and powerful hold the country at ransom. Kenya's potential remains stifled in part because of the impunity of Kenya's leadership. Kenya's economy used to be bigger than Uganda's and Tanzania's combined. Today, the two sister countries are almost catching up with Kenya: Article This is not because Kenyans are not hardworking, but because many are deliberately denied opportunity. Although we espouse capitalist ideals, we have turned Kenya into a resource to be milked at every opportunity by a greedy few, well-placed to 'eat'. Kenya's lands, for example, have become the avenue to wealth for the well-connected people. A lot of Kenya's project funding is routinely pilfered by the well-connected. Our MPs are some of the highest paid in the world. This in itself is ridiculous for a poor country like Kenya. To add more parliamentary seats to the current burden is not justifiable. What PNU MPs are asking for is very self-indulgent and bad for the country.

As the gap between the rich and poor continues to widen, even in Central Kenya, the risk of social disruption is real. Already, in some parts of Central Kenya, youth anarchy is a reality. Last year, some people from the region couldn't celebrate Christmas in their rural homes as is the Kenyan tradition, because of insecurity. Some communities have degenerated to the point that, if a vehicle arrives in the home, the owner has to pay in order to protect his guests. So what kind of country are we building? There are those who now believe that the young people are simply modelling their behavior on that of Kenyan leaders. We cannot forge a nation if a privileged few insist on getting what they want all of the time. Compromises have to be made for the sake of the country: Article

Central Kenya's own sons and daughters have started questioning this "winner take all" instinct of the ruling elites, which pays no attention to the chaos created in its wake. According to Muthoni Wanyeki, the Executive Director of Kenya Human Rights Commision, an initiative, 'Kikuyus for Change,' which 'seeks to both understand why the rest of Kenya hates Gikuyus, and why Gikuyus (or rather, the Gikuyu economic and political establishment) are so adamant about the need to hold on to power' has been launched. She thinks that 'they lack a clear understanding of what equality or non-discrimination actually mean and how, from independence on, the equality provisions in our current constitution have failed to be realized by the public.' Under the circumstances, when MPs from Central Kenya prioritize the issues of marginalization and equality as pertaining solely to the region they hail from, they are rubbishing the Kenyan experience of poverty and marginalization, particularly in the many other regions which are much worse hit: Article . As long as these legislators continue to think and act in greedy and selfish terms, it should not be a surprise to them, or to the larger public, when other communities clamour for "autonomy." Kenyan voters need to learn to condemn the selfish actions taken by their leaders, supposedly on their behalf. These actions ultimately affect the whole of Kenya: Article

After the NARC revolution (many, myself included, voted for Kibaki), a relative died and I had to rush home for the burial. I decided to use an early "Wepesi" so that I would arrive home before burial by around 2 pm. At 6.00am, I was at the Wepesi terminus, only to discover that Wepesi no longer existed. I was directed to Nyama Kima, where I got into a minibus. The operator of the minibus took the necessary bus fare, then "sold" me to another minibus an hour later. These changes occurred two more times, with the last change in Eldoret where we had to sit for 2 hours. I arrived home finally at 6 pm, frustrated, tired and bitter, as I was too late to attend my cousin's funeral. This incident made me wonder what had happened to the young men who used to forge their livelihoods at Wepesi. When I returned home, I started to focus my attention on what was happening to the transport sector in general. Basically the same thing that was happening to national resources: Public transport was changing hands in favor of the politically correct (and their bank accounts); even the Kenya Bus service was not spared. Other upcountry routes have been affected similarly.

"The need to hold on to power" has given rise to a culture which has cheapened lives and livelihoods for the sake of money; and now our children are copying this culture. Muggings have become an accepted way of life; the police often describe violent deaths from muggings as "normal thuggery." Our own children force us to "pay taxes" in order to buy our own security in our villages and homes; and we have no choice because they can kill us right there!!!! Yet we keep doing the same things we have been doing for forty seven years. Life has become so cheap in Kenya, in spite of the fact that we are supposed to be a peaceful country. When leaders are allowed to do so much harm to fellow citizens without sanctions, it becomes difficult for them to give up power. The obscenely rich elites in the country have to protect their wealth; hence the ethnic political groupings. In my humble submission, this is what ails Kenya. This is why you don't hear of a true national agenda for reform. Maybe to these people there is nothing wrong with Kenya. This why they want to retain the same kind of constitution; after all, it has served them very well so far. And yet we all know that if power was to shift into the hands of another ethnic group under the ridiculous 'new' constitution, the same political elites in PNU would be out on the streets, leading wananchi in protest against whoever the new totalitarian dictator happened to be.

I have been highly critical towards PNU MPs for their selfishness and greed in this article. But it takes two to tango. This brings us to ODM MPs, who supposedly had a different stance from their PNU colleagues before they set foot in Naivasha. Why was it so easy for PNU to bulldoze ODM into laying aside their own demands? Were they ever really serious about presenting a different perspective or is it possible that the whole 'negotiation' was just a facade? Is it possible that 'the air up there' is so sweet that ODM MPs have forgotten what life is like for the average Kenyan citizen? ODM owes Kenyans an explanation. Do they believe this is the constitution that will change Kenya? If not, why did they agree to it? If it is no different from the one we have, why change the constitution at all? The average Kenyan is surely shaking his/ her head with bitterness at the amounts of time and money (national resources) wasted so that our MPs could have a nice holiday in a beautiful setting. This is precisely what we call non-productivity, and if our MPs were the employees of a private corporation, they surely would all have been fired. Nelson Mandela spoke some wise words: "To be free is not merely to cast off one's chains, but to live in a way that respects the freedoms of others." As our MPs sit in luxurious resorts, eating delicious delicacies funded by wananchi, and under-performing, they should remember that the Kenya they are making is the very Kenya that they, their children and grandchildren will have to live in. It makes no sense to make bad choices today, and then turn around and start leading national prayer meetings to appeal to God when the catastrophic weight of the bad decisions they have been making for decades starts to suffocate the nation. When sitting down to create a constitution, they must assume that the next president will be their political rival. That way, the constitution they create will be one that keeps any self-centered Kenyan president or political class in check.

Selected References
1. Jibril Adan: 'Team that ensured we got "white smoke."' The Standard, 5th February 2010.
2. Peter Thiatiah: 'Land sharks, vandals, push community to the wall.' Sunday Standard, 22nd January 2006.
3. Tom Wolf: 'Pure or not, system has fault lines for MPs, President.' The Standard, 5th February, 2010.
4. Job Weru & Winsley Masese: 'Can country's economy sustain seats created by PSC?' The Standard, 5th February 2010.
5. Ochieng W: Themes in Kenyan History. Heinneman Kenya, 1990.
6. Munyoni Wanyeki: 'Loving each other will not cure "negative ethnicity."' The East African, Ist January 2010.

Kenyans should take a fresh look at what the parliamentary system of governance offers versus what has been proposed by the Parliamentary Select Committee. In fact, now that devolution to counties is potentially formalized in the draft, it will be very easy for anybody running for president to form a governing coalition with their ethnicities of choice, thus usher an Imperial Presidency. Such a coalition can be put together (Kenya style) soon after parliamentary elections, when all the key players are known. The President can then rely on civil servants (as has been happening), who really are the ones who implement government policy in the presidential system, totally unsupervised. That is why some are so arrogant even to development partners who help fund the country's programmes. In the current Presidential (forced coalition)system, some civil servants are even more powerful than the PM can ever be. Such civil servants usually facilitate only the President's agenda. They are also the ones who prop up dictatorships, once a governing coalition (starting with parliamentarians) is in place.

It would be very embarrassing for Kenyans to have spent so much time, money and effort, only for us to start complaining after a few months about the failure of the "new constitution," to deliver on its promises. But the reason would be quite simple: constitutions can't deliver the changes we desire, unless the people make those changes possible -all the people. Yet this is Kenya and we know what we have endured. Lets take time and be sure this is what we really want. Then we should accept the consequences and live with whatever monster we have accepted: the prospect of winner-take-all is still very much alive in this draft.

Prof Anyang' Nyong'o has outlined the benefits of the parliamentary versus presidential system in the following article: http://www.marsgroupkenya.org/multimedia/?StoryID=278676
I will highlight two points from the article:
1. As opposed to what has been highlighted in the press, MPs don't choose the PM. By voting in the most popular party, the people automatically choose their PM, because the PM is the leader of the most popular party in parliament. This is the person (and his team) who goes around the country soliciting for support for his/her party.

2. A parliamentary system has the potential to reduce the ethnic polarization in the country because it allows you to vote for your favorite MP and at the same time vote for your favorite party. There is no opportunity to forge ethnic coalitions as has been happening in the presidential system. Parliament then gets the opportunity to interrogate the PM, regarding government programmes, and you are able to interrogate your MP. I suspect scums like what is happening to the education sector funds would be carried out in a less audacious manner if a parliamentary system were in place.

NB Please log in to leave a comment.

Emerging views indicate that Kenya is likely to adopt a system of governance based on the US model in its draft constitution. This goes against the grain of the majority's suggestions. This is a very Kenyan outcome: the public's wishes are often ignored when it comes to governance issues. Kenyans have suffered too much at the hands of an all powerful presidency to be ignored this time round. If the legislators insist on imposing an American model of governance, Kenyans should reject it at the referendum. This is because Kenyan institutions are still too weak to check a powerful presidency. To illustrate, I will cite the fiasco in the education sector:

Allegedly, the Ministry of Education wired money meant for infrastructure development to school accounts. Then fresh instructions were issued from the same ministry for most of the money to be wired to another account whose owner was not known. The headmasters complied without asking the necessary questions. The result? Falling educational standards in public schools, because it turns out that this practice has been going on since 2003. It is a donor who contributed to the education fund who raised the alarm. Does this mean that if the donor hadn't asked questions the practice would have continued until another president/ political party took over? Notably, the donor was told to shut up because they contributed only 5% to the fund. The majority contributors i.e the taxpayers and parents of the children whose lives are in the process of being ruined can do nothing. As the sheng generation would say, "Mtado?" This roughly translates as, "What are you going to do about it?"

The success of the American model of governance relies heavily on strong governance institutions, and censuring of leadership by voters. The Kenyan situation, on the contrary, thrives on who has the guts to steal most. When those who steal are caught, they find the legal system easy to maneuver if they are moneyed. It seems that Kenyans have learned few lessons from Africa's history in slavery and colonialism. Kenyans need to be vigilant about the possibility that, 10 years down the road, Kenya will have the same kinds of problems that Nigeria has today. And Africa's youth need to be vigilant about the prospect of the recolonization of their continent.

Lets go down memory lane: It has been over 500 years since Africa was first invaded on a large scale, and her peoples subjected to slavery. There were African collaborators (both rulers and ruled) to this heinous act. Use of alcoholic spirits took a foothold on the continent during this period: alcohol was used to induce the leadership to capture more slaves. The culture of "kitu kidogo" still reigns supreme to date: Africans, it seems, can do anything for money (or other inducements). And this is widely known. It has been widely reported in the media that African leaders frequently receive "envelopes" from Gaddafi at AU meetings. Gaddafi is trying to become "King of Africa": http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/-/2558/479514/-/s1rggiz/-/index.html . What services do they offer in return for these gifts? These are cultural weaknesses today's Africans must confront, especially if, like Kenyans, they are shaping a constitution for posterity.

I have read that "an independent judiciary," and members of parliament will check the executive in the new draft of the Kenyan constitution. Why haven't we seen vestiges of this independence in the past? The culture of a people cannot change suddenly just because we have a new constitution. Let's consider the state of present-day Kenya: A powerful presidency has, over the decades, created extreme disparities along class and ethnic lines. There is now an emerging possibility of a dangerous religious divide. Kenya should not underestimate the resilience of her minorities. The radicalization of Muslim youths should awaken Kenyans to the truth about Kenya's "robust" economy: Why are so many Kenyans starving when the economy is supposedly robust? Why does there seem to be so much money in the construction/ real estate sectors? (http://www.bruneinews.net/story/584430) How many Kenyans have died in collapsing buildings since 2003? Why are we surprised when people follow their money? You can't take people's money in secret deals, then expect them to make no political demands.

Because of a flawed leadership culture, Kenyans have acquired a materialistic culture that seems to have no limits: they can do anything for money. They can also do anything for power. Under the proposed constitution, why wouldn't a powerful President cut deals with MPs/ Judges in order to push his agenda in parliament? The proposed draft even gives the President powers to appoint ministers from among "his non-elected buddies," as articulated in Mutahi Ngunyi's article below:
http://www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/-/440808/847930/-/5qdtmi/-/index.html

References
1. Walter Menya: 'Sh. 6bn school fund stolen.' Sunday Nation on the web, 14th December 2009, http://allafrica.com/stories/200912141749.html .
2. Lucy Oriang: 'Captain, the ship is leaking.' Nation on the web, 22nd January 2010, http://www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/-/440808/846998/-/5qd5gv/-/index.html .
3. Fred Oluoch: 'Constitution is not out of the woods yet.' Nation on the Web, 22nd January 2010, http://www.nation.co.ke/News/politics/-/1064/847704/-/wsc3j3z/-/.
4. Wakabi & Halima: 'Africa: Gadaffi crowned "King of Kings" as he seeks to create African Government.' The East African, 12th October 2008, http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/-/2558/479514/-/s1rggiz/-/index.html .
5. 'Gaddafi: Africa's "King of Kings."' BBC News Online, 29th August 2008, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7588033.stm .
6. Mutahi Ngunyi: 'Will the PSC compromise jump-start national healing?' Nation on the Web, January 23rd 2010, http://www.nation.co.ke/oped/Opinion/-/440808/847930/-/5qdtmi/-/index.html .
7. 'Ransom money goes into Kenya property market.' Brunei News.Net, January 2nd 2010, http://www.bruneinews.net/story/584430 .

There is a reason why cultures that have developed to great heights regulate their sexuality: unregulated sexual activity costs individuals and society at large. I will focus on the current polygamy debate. First of all, lets get the definition straight: polygamy is a Creek word which means "the practice of multiple marriage." This definition does not limit the practice to men alone. Patriarchal Africa has assumed it means a man marrying many wives because that is what they want to believe. The correct term for men marrying many women is "polygyny."

The opposite term for women marrying many men is "polyandry." However, there is a reason why we have accepted what goes on in Africa as polygamy: many women is such unions often seek sexual gratification from men other than their husbands. Because of their economic dependence on the men however, they keep such associations secrete. The significance of such polygamy in the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs) cannot therefore be ignored. I have discussed this, and the emotional cost of polygyny in my coming book, 'The Heritage of Maize is killing Africans' (www.nutritionafrica.com).

Polygamy has emotional, economic and developmental costs that in part can help explain where Africa is today, when compared to other major cultures. Corruption in many African governments has been linked through research to the need for men to support many women and children. Individuals raised in polygamous families tend to have an emotional hunger that is never quenched by material wealth. Patriarchal Africa tends to ignore the emotional pain women and children must endure in order to accommodate polygyny (if they didn't feel such pain, they couldn't really have loved you that much). If you want to know whether the status of a polygamous union is healthy for the inmates, look at the women, and the offspring. In many cases, you will find premature deaths of the women and or a wayward behavior among many of the children.

Retired cleric Timothy Njoya should be taken seriously when he talks of allowing "polyandry in our society." This is because it is common knowledge that in communities where polygyny is allowed, hidden polyandry is common. In fact trends suggest that as Africa continues to rely more and more on its women to raise their children single handed, we are heading towards a matriarchy. Matriarchies tend to be dominated by polyandry. The tendency towards a matriarchy is considered by anthropologists to signify a cultural regression. Indeed, the recent observation of pockets of male underdevelopment should worry African leaders more than the debate on polygyny. Is Africa ready to indulge the few men who can afford to keep many women at taxpayer expense, while Africa's youths remain neglected? The article about Zuma (8)should be condemed also. Leaders like Zuma are cheating Africa's youth. A majority don't have the kind of money he has to look after themselves. Many can hardly afford a descent meal thanks to the poor leadership his likes provide!

REFERENCES
1. Polygamy: Wikipedia the free encyclopedia.
2. Daniel Wesangula: 'Polygamy-Kenya speaks out. Daily Nation 9th January 2010.
3. Weisner et al: 'African Families in Crisis of Social Change.' Bergin & Garvey 1997.
4. Caldel et al: 'The Social Context of AIDS in SSA.' Population and Development Review15(2): 185 1989.
5. Bledsoe & Pison: 'Nuptiality in SSA.' Clarendon Press 1994.
6. Wachira Kigotho: 'UNESCO: Emerging Pockets of Boy Underdevelopment.' The Standard 23rd April 2009.
7. Agencies: 'Swaziland: Women challenge royal extravagance'. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2008-08/22/content_6960780.htm
8. Prega Govender: 'Zuma's Love Child with Friends' Daughter.' Daily Nation 31st January 2010.

Even as Kenyans haggle over the structures of governance to be adopted in the draft constitution, the conduct of our ruling elites when dealing with public resources leaves one wondering why we have written laws. What is the use of the constitution if the laws of the land are habitually broken by those who should know better? It seems that Africans governed themselves better before written law was imposed on them. Today, the powerful seem able to exploit every opportunity they can, enriching themselves, by breaking the law (and getting away with it).

The Mau Forest saga would never have arisen had the law of the land been applied appropriately, according to Mr. Paul Ndungu. Mr. Ndungu is an advocate of the High Court, and he chaired the Commission of Inquiry into the illegal allocation of public land, the report of which was accepted by the government. So why are there discordant voices regarding the Mau issue, as if there is no guiding law? Do Kenyans make laws to govern only the poor? Please read Mr. Ndungu's article on this subject here:

http://allafrica.com/stories/201001070933.html