Presidency duel major cause of divisive politics
Competition for the presidency, desire for inclusion in governance at the top levels, backed by ethnicised politics and competition for resources are the leading contributors to divisive elections that rock the country after every five years.
During hearings by the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI) technical team, Kenyans associated the winner-takes-all-system with the divisive elections, saying presidential contests “have taken the quality of a do-or-die affair”, and rigging becomes part of political plots.
The electorate thinks unless their respective kingpins get the Presidency, they will be shortchanged in terms of resources distribution and development and so whenever their tribal leaders lose, they violently join in refusing to accept defeat.
A citizen who presented his views to the task force, according to the full report which was handed over to President Uhuru Kenyatta on Monday, said “people want their own in power because resources go with the presidency”.
“The importance of the outcome (of a presidential race) for major politicians (in a winner-takes-all system) is so high that there is either the strong temptation to rig votes or to reject the results of credible elections,” reads part of the 156-page report by the team that was chaired by Garrissa Senator Yusuf Haji.
With the perceived high stakes of the winner-takes-all system, the team observed that the presidential contest has taken the quality of a do-or-die affair, which leads to extreme skepticism and mistrust of the electoral process.
For instance, during the last elections, President Uhuru had won the August 6 presidential contest but his main opponent Raila Odinga rejected the results and moved to the Supreme Court, which cancelled the results and ordered a rerun.
But Raila, who was accusing the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) of conspiring with Jubilee Party to short change him, declined to participate in the repeat poll and even attempted to block the exercise through violence.
Risk crisis
When IEBC chairman Wafula Chebukati declared President Kenyatta as the winner, and after he was sworn in for a second term, the opposition backers took to the streets leading to deaths and destruction of property.
To cure the divisive politics, which sometimes have led to post-poll chaos with the worst case being in 2007 when over 1,300 people were killed and over 350,000 others displaced, the team recommended a model that minds the ethnically divided nation.
“Kenyans are tired of elections that bring the economy to a standstill every few years and feel that politics has become too adversarial while trying to entrench itself in every phase of their waking lives.
They would like more stable and predictable politics that are democratic and produce governance at the National and County levels that is inclusive of our ethnic, religious, and regional diversity.”
“(But) if we maintain the status quo, it will mean that every five years Kenyans will risk crisis, ethnic division, and possibly even violence,” says the report.
The remedy, according to the BBI team, should include creating the position of a prime minister, who will be appointed by the President and a strong opposition where the runner-up of the presidential election becomes an ex-officio in Parliament.
The premier’s position, the team has suggested, should be occupied by a Member of Parliament from the party with the majority members in the House, in what leaves the fate of the position of Majority Leader hanging in the balance.
The prime minister will have the responsibility of heading Cabinet ministers and together, they will be collectively responsible in the National Assembly for the execution of the affairs of the government.
The PM’s responsibilities will include supervising and executing day-to-day functions and affairs of the government and will have a say in the appointment of ministers as the team recommends that he or she be consulted.
Cabinet secretaries, who the report proposes they be called Cabinet ministers, should be drawn from both parliamentarians and technocrats with the latter being ex officio MPs upon successful approval.
However, the position, whose pay is equal to that of an MP, has no security of tenure as the president may dismiss him or her through a vote of no confidence in Parliament.
Further to end the winner-takes-all system, the runner-up of the presidential election automatically becomes the Leader of the official Opposition, but on condition that his or her party is not represented in the government.
Presently, the runner-up, despite garnering a significant number of votes is plunged into the political oblivion for five years, until the next election.
