Moves by Anti-Ruto Brigade Quite Desperate and Dangerous

Fear mongering and mudslinging is the latest move by anti-Ruto brigade within the Kenyan political arena. The past seven days have seen hordes of photo-shopped pictures and video clips dangerously doing rounds on WhatsApp groups, Facebook posts, and have thus spread far and wide. Many a pretender to political commentary have made nonsense of themselves trying to push a narrative from the clips and photos while pro Ruto army did not hesitate from answering back with their own political jabs without contrition. It has been a messy week to say the least in the political streetwise.

Of major interest to me is the clip in which William Ruto is on JKL answering a question from veteran Koinange on the land clauses in the then proposed draft constitution. Ruto give his very unqualified interpretation of the land clauses in the draft as he explained why he was opposed to the draft. In there he mentions that what he understood the clauses to imply was that some non natives would be required to move from lands and leave them to natives in which case he uses Kitale and mentions a few tribes to drive his point home. Suffice to say that he was wrong in his lay interpretation and his fears were utterly unfounded. 

However, the way the clip has been truncated to sell a narrative is not only desperate but also displays a dire desperateness on the part of the anti-Ruto team. It appears to me like there is a feeling of hopelessness in that camp in their quest for an alternative narrative to the Hustler’s bottom up economic model which has attracted a huge chunk of lower and middle class. The dire need for that counter narrative is sending that camp into panic mode as elections draw ever closer and closer at a pace that looks like a week every day. I must add that it’s a bed they made for themselves with the comfort of a handshake and BBI and so they must sleep on it. If they had wanted, they could have made the best of both worlds as the official opposition and at time major partners in the government. They did not.

The clip is dangerous. It shows the lengths some of us are willing to go just to gain some advantage in politics and it doesn’t matter to them whether the national fabric is torn in the process. That video can mislead some Ruto supporters to start a move to root out non natives in the misunderstanding that that was what Ruto said. Hence, the narrative, if bought, can lead to the destruction of the very lives of the people it seeks to protect by not electing the Deputy President. If the narrative is not bought (it likely won’t be) is a bad smack on the face of the anti-Ruto brigade. It is imperative that his political opponents craft a proper counter narrative devoid of the dangers posed by their current flirtations with trouble. Popcorn please!

This is the point; William Ruto, like him on hate him has tremendously influenced how we do politics and what we say during campaigns. He has largely brought the country to a point where we can have genuine conversation on what should be our approach to economic management and as they say Mghalla muue na haki yake umpe, the DP has his sins like everyone in the field. He has, nonetheless, brought us here where we can discuss issues. Let us not pull all of us down in the desperate desire to see him fail to clinch the presidency. It seems like the DP is poised to singlehandedly pull a 2002 moment with his non tribal hustler movement and if he does, I hope he stays true to his assertions. If he pulls this off, it will be a step in the right direction as far as rooting out tribalism is concerned. If he walks the talk, William can create a sense of nationhood and make all of us understand that the principles that make us Kenyans are greater than the feelings that make us our tribes. Here’s hoping and praying.

Handing over Ritual is Not a constitutional requirement

The constitution of Kenya 2010 is an interesting document and has been dubbed in some quarters as one of the best and most progressive in the world. It’s the manner in which it deals with possible legal stand offs that’s most admirable. A supreme law should be precise and straight forward in its letter and strongly implicit in its spirit. Ours appears to be such despite some discomfort in some of us. But it is the zeal with which the Judiciary has stood in defence of the Constitution that is most admirable. Of course this is not to downplay the role played by the lawyers who argue in favour proper application of the law; I suppose the advocates form a core part of the legal fraternity by extension are part of the Judiciary.

As it stands, if elections are held today, William Ruto stands the highest chance of winning and if things don’t change significantly— and I suspect they won’t— we are headed for a William Ruto presidency. I say a Ruto presidency because I do not expect anything to stand in his way if he wins. Our law envisages a smooth transition from one administration to another whether or not any player in our politics is okay with such transition. The main part of the transition is the swearing in in the presence of the Chief Justice or her deputy in the absence thereof.  Our law is in the mould of the  American one.

For some time now, there has been, albeit silently, talk of a possible refusal by an incumbent to hand over power to a president elect for whatever God forsaken reason that may be. Those who think, suggest or even imagine this can happen are still stuck in the sadly very African perception of power. The way our law is set is such that it has to be changed for anyone to hold power beyond the election and swearing in of another president. Power is given by the people through an election and lost through the same means. You cease to hold it the moment another person is elected and sworn in. 

One may argue that the swearing it may be prevented but even this is not possible. The only way you can stop a swearing in in to stop the Chief Justice from carrying out his responsibility of swearing in the new president. The CJ being a holder of an independent office can not be ordered not to carry out her constitutional responsibility of swearing in the president elect. It’s a process that’s guided by law and no one can chose which part of the law to obey and which one not to. Every other ritual outside of what the law provides is simply a ritual that is inconsequential to the process. Understand the Kenyan law, power is assumed by the new president. He needs no hand over to assume it just like in America.

Such talk is cheap. It’s thoughtless. It’s dangerous and foolhardy. It is a serpentine and disturbing flirtation with trouble and entertaining such thoughts is being completely oblivious to the fact that we are only one stupid act away from anarchy. If we didn’t learn from Rwandan genocide in 1994 we should have learned from 2007 post election violence. If there be anyone among us who has not learnt from those two unfortunate events, she must never be allowed to drop us into chaos. Civility is being able to dislike someone but still defend his rights. Democracy is voting one person, party or group but accepting and defending the right of another to lead once they win. We have peace today. Let us guard it jealously. Let those who have wisdom understand.

 

Tuju’s Rant Is a bad dent on Government

Mr Raphael Tuju is a man with to sides, quite literally. He is two things but he is not half one and half the other. Nay. He is one thing, wholly, and then  the other, wholly as well. He is cabinet Secretary in the Jubilee government with no portfolio. But, he is also the Jubilee party Secretary General. This means that he represents the party interests in the government and he represents government interests in the party. Seemingly a tough balancing act I must say. But it may not necessarily be as tough as it may look. He is serving the purpose for his appointment.

Let me break it down. President Uhuru Kenyatta has from the onset seemed very uncomfortable with the rules laid down by the constitution of Kenya 2010 with regard to many things including conduct and establishment of government, independence of institutions, separation of powers and nearly everything else. How else do you explain his attempt at effecting around seventy five (75) amendments in that sacred document through illegal means? It has been his norm to use unorthodox means to beat the requirements of the law or forego his constitutional obligations. This qualifies as a discussion for another day, though.

The president has never been comfortable with the requirement of the supreme law that Cabinet Secretary positions must not be held by serving members of parliament. He has always wanted politicians doubling as members of the executive and parliament to allow himself a little more latitude in his quest to control parliament. But since that was not possible under the law, he launched a three pronged attack on that principle.

First, he created an utterly meaningless and obviously illegal position of the Chief Administrative Secretary (CAS) and into it appointed many politicians and retained the position despite declarations by the courts that it is unconstitutional. Secondly, he proposed amendments to the constitution to allow parliamentarians to be selected as CSs. Thirdly, and this I consider big, the  cunningly appointed a politician into the cabinet in the person of Mr. Raphael Tuju and assigned him no role. This way, Uhuru achieved two things; an implicit but direct and powerful link to parliament via the party organs and explicit control over Jubilee members of parliament via the power wielded by the Secretary general of the party. And, boy, hasn’t he succeeded big time?

Now, Raphael Tuju as two things, plays two roles. Whenever he speaks from any government office as CS, he speaks for Jubilee party in government. When He speaks from Jubilee house as party Secretary general, Tuju speaks for the Executive in Jubilee. Period.

Thus, the CS without portfolio’s attack on the DP from the party headquarters was actually government attacking its own deputy president. What he said and how he conducted himself can therefore be accordingly construed as Cabinet position on and attitude towards the Deputy president. At this point, the fight within Jubilee is dangerously bare knuckled. We need to be careful and for a president who speaks unity of the nation every few sentences of his speeches, he’s rendered shamefully hypocritical by his own cabinet appointee. After Dr. Matiang’i recently gave an absolutely irrelevant explanation of why security of the DP was changed by providing a list of the properties owned by the deputy and Tuju confirming the real intention behind it by asking the DP to explain the quick wealth increase, the president’s hand in the woes of his deputy can be seen all over and this makes nonsense of his unity call.

It’s time for the president to rise up above the politics of the day. I am sure the man Uhuru Kenyatta is a good man with good intentions. Even his discomfort with the law is possibly the making of guys who refuse to accept that they can no longer use parliament to get things done by simply engineering some artificial blackmail via demand for ministerial statements. I suspect that people who have issues with the DP are working round the clock to keep the misunderstanding between him and his deputy as it is. Unfortunately, this looks destined to leave the country more divided and with deeper political wounds that ever. What the men close to the president are doing and the advice they’re giving him is antithetical to what would have been his biggest legacy. A united Kenya.

ARE YOU A PREACHER OR A MOTIVATIONAL SPEAKER

• It might be true. It might even be helpful. But is it preaching? 
• Some preaching that is considered great by many is nothing more than a motivational speech. It might be true, it might even be helpful. It may help you succeed at work. But too often all one has done is changed the title from the latest pop-psychologist’s seminar from “how to succeed” to “how to fulfill God’s purpose” where God’s purpose is defined as “succeeding in this life.”

It is almost rampant in some circles. In fact, some see this as the epitome of “relevant” preaching. The person comes and learns a skill or a mindset that will help them finally break the boundaries that keep them from that promotion. Maybe others finally decide to go back to school or change their career. Perhaps others find ways to become better planners and thus are more effective in their financial life. And then the preacher sits down. Sometimes the people shout, other times they sit there contemplating the message, but in too many cases what is missing greatly outweighs the benefits of these messages.

When a sermon is merely a motivational speech, what is missing? At least two things:

The Cross is Missing

The first thing that is missing from this kind of preaching is the cross. Sometimes the preacher may tack it on at the end, but even in those cases the cross is reduced from the pinnacle of God’s work on behalf of humanity to simply a mechanism to help me do better at work. The cross, both Jesus’ and ours, is totally missing. The idea of our sin causing the death of Christ in some way is totally absent from this message. The idea that we are to take up our cross and follow is also absent.

In short, the Gospel is missing from many of these presentations and thus no matter how eloquent or well visited, this kind of preaching is missing the real power that comes from preaching “Christ and Him Crucified.”

The Coming Kingdom is Missing

In many of these sermons, the idea of God’s coming kingdom is totally missing. Whether it be how we are to prepare for the coming kingdom, or whether it be how the coming kingdom is different from the current “kingdoms,” this aspect of true preaching is often missing from the “motivational preaching” sermons.

If you are not preaching the cross and the coming kingdom, then one must ask oneself, what are the eternal consequences of my present preaching? If someone comes to your church after hearing about a cancer diagnosis, what does your sermon about being a success have to do with that one? If someone is in the midst of despair and needs to hear a word about the coming kingdom where righteousness reigns, what does your message have to say to them?

People can get motivational speeches in any number of places, but when they come to church they have come to hear a preacher. There is a time and place for the motivational speech, but if you as a preacher use up all of your time being simply another place, then you have not done your duty. For a preacher to degenerate into a facsimile of Oprah Winfrey or Tony Robbins is to step down from the height of speaking God’s words to humanity to speaking good advice gleaned from the best human thinkers.  

GUEST.

Matiang’i’s Answers to Security committee, petty

 The events of the past week in the Kenyan political arena were as interesting as they were annoying. The political storm that brewed in the wake of government’s withdrawal of the Deputy President’s security (for that is what it was) has been enormous and the conversations sequel to it captivating. Interestingly, the deputy , who is often portrayed by his detractors as an aggressive and easily agitated fellow, has been hugely calm and impressively restrained in the way he has handled the hullabaloo. He somehow still found a way to score political points by welcoming the AP officers with a courtesy cup of tea and a public display of his personal hospitality.

The man who in my opinion screwed up things, again, was the CS for interior Fred Matiang’i. The man’s explanation of the actions of the government to the parliamentary committee on security were at best pedestrian and at worst petty. The matter was never concerned with the properties owned by Mr. Ruto that are being secured by the police but the withdrawal of the closer layer of GSU security officers from his residence and the subsequent replacement thereof by AP officers. This would have been answered simply by explaining that it was a one to one replacement occasioned by the reasignment of duties. But to delve into the number of properties owned by Ruto and which the police are providing general security for is not just dishonest but also petty. It is a desperate attempt at discrediting the Deputy President as the leader of the Hustler Movement. In their simplistic understanding of the Hustler Movement, they seem to think that is a movement of the have nots and so should be led by a poor man. Quite absurd. Everyone knows the William Ruto is not a poor man. They simply want to continue propagating their propaganda that the Hustler Movement is an anti rich movement. The Hustler Movement is not anti-rich. It's pro-poor and middle class.

 It’s not unbeknownst to many in Kenya that properties of most VIPs are by government security personnel and an attempt to make it look like only the DP’s property is nothing short of desperate pettiness. It's an attempt to mislead the public And the pertinent answers were not given in the wake of pertinent questions even if our parliamentarians too seemed to ask silly questions. In fact the whole session looked like a wealth declaration exercise albeit by non owners of the declared property. A waste of time and resources. The DP had indicated that he was okay with being guarded by the Aps and much of what was discussed was irrelevant to the issue at hand. 

The most important questions would have been these:

1. Why were the GSU officers withdrawn?

2. Why did the reassignment of duties happen at around this time?

3. What was the number of GSU officers withdrawn and what number of Aps replaced them.

4. Was the reassignment of duties done in private residences of the deputy president, supposedly in accordance with the law? If so, could such reassignment happen in relation to the president’s Gatundu and other private residences?

5. Is the deputy President’s residence regarded as private?

In the matter of the DP’s security, the president’s advisors have once again screwed up and that has helped his deputy. It’s important that the president begins to be careful with the advice that comes his way at this point in time having greatly flopped with the BBI. A president who speaks unity of purpose in every of his speeches must not be seen to side line a front runner in the homestretch to the 2022 election. A war of egos doesn’t help his course.