Last week, I highlighted two potential
flashpoints — the IEBC and the Supreme Court — that portend a dangerous
future for Kenya as we look ahead to the next elections, bearing in mind
the events that culminated in the 2007/8 violence.
I
raise these issues because Kenya is bigger than any individual and
because governance is not a sport with winners and losers. We either all
win, or we all lose.
But the lack of legitimacy of the
IEBC as currently constituted and a pro-status quo Supreme Court that
does not flinch as it weakens the Constitution are not our only
flashpoints.
President Kenyatta’s remarkable statement
in the aftermath of the horrendous and deadly attack in Mpeketoni
vividly illustrates another flashpoint.
After the 2005
referendum there was a sense — rightly or wrongly — that President
Kibaki was favouring one tribe over others, fuelling massive discontent,
especially after the high hopes that his election had generated.
SCOURGE OF MOI ERA
Tribalism
had been one of the scourges of the Moi era, as Kenyans watched the
diversion of public resources to Moi’s home area and support base, as
well as the appointment of barely qualified individuals to high office.
One
of my classmates at university, for instance, was appointed company
secretary of a major parastatal before he had even completed his
pupilage at the Kenya School of Law!
Kibaki was
expected, and had promised, to be different from Moi, hence the
outpouring of support from across Kenya. But he soon appeared keener on
simply replacing the “Kalenjin Home Boys” with his “Mt. Kenya Mafia.”
Kenyatta’s
statement this week blasting ethnic profiling, unfortunately, has lent
itself to similar interpretations, especially after the blatant ethnic
profiling that his regime has been mercilessly conducting against the
Somali and Muslim communities over alleged involvement in terrorism.
"SUBSERVIENT SECURITY FORCES"
Ethnic
profiling, ethnic hatred, community punishment, hate speech and
incitement must be condemned whether propagated against the Somali, Luo,
Arabs, Kikuyu, Kalenjin or Kisii. There should be only one standard,
and it speaks volumes that Kenyatta came out on this only when he felt
that his community was being targeted. Rather than reduce ethnic
tensions, this approach only fans the flames.
His
statement could have had more resonance and credibility had he come out
as strongly to condemn the ethnic conflicts in Mandera. And what about
the violence and conflicts in Samburu? Baringo? Bungoma? Kitui? Wajir?
Marsabit, which produced more than 50,000 IDPs from November last year
to February? Does it mean that some communities are more Kenyan than
others?
I don’t know if he has any evidence
contradicting al-Shabaab claims of responsibility for perpetrating the
attacks in Mpeketoni. Yet it is no small matter when a President
declares so categorically that this was an opposition-sponsored attack,
and not one perpetrated by al-Shabaab despite their confessions. And I
hope that we now don’t see our subservient security forces going out to
manufacture “evidence.”
GRAVE ACCUSATIONS
The
accusations are weighty, bordering on crimes against humanity. Which
then behoves Kenyatta, more than anyone else, to tread carefully and
ensure he can back them up solidly and legitimately.
That
means that rather than make such grave accusations in a press briefing,
the proper approach would be to arrest the perpetrators and provide the
evidence. In fact, it is defamatory to accuse anyone of such heinous
crimes without evidence. And though Kenyatta mentioned no names, it was
clear to whom he was alluding.
Peace needs measured
and calm statements from all our leaders, which were lacking after the
2005 referendum and is lacking now. Yes, it is fine to defend the
regime, as it is fine to criticise it. But when reckless and dangerous
statements are bandied around easily, including from the presidential
platform, we are surely fuelling the flames.
No comments :
Post a Comment