Jubilee should learn from Moi’s mistakes on the Saba Saba rally

Former Foreign Affairs Minister Robert Ouko. "For if such a loyal and competent defender of the regime could be so brutally killed, no one was safe". PHOTO/FILE 

In Summary

• The 1988 mlolongo elections were especially crucial in bolstering discontent as unpopular politicians were sent to Parliament, solely because of their sycophancy to President Moi.
• Venom and vitriol abound against Odinga and the opposition, including using the presidential platform to make dubious accusations of involvement in terrorism, ironically heightening support.

By Maina Kiai
More by this Author

The plans for the Saba Saba rally at Uhuru Park have elicited a range of reactions. Some welcome it as a necessary event to send a message to the ruling elite of their discontent. Others feel we should all have “accepted and moved on,” after the elections, leaving “politics” till the next elections.

 

But no matter whether we support the Saba Saba plans or not, Article 37 of the Constitution allows each of us to assemble, without arms and peacefully, to express our views. And this is not a privilege from the regime, but a right that is inalienable.

There are some who crave the old days, when the word of the President was (illegally) taken as law. They are now claiming that insecurity is rising because we now have the human rights we fought for, yearning for the old dictatorial days when corruption, poverty, repression and fear went hand in hand.

But they are deliberately and dishonestly white-washing history. For did not massacres, ethnic cleansing, tribal clashes, assassinations thrive in those days? Was not crime so ubiquitous that Nairobi was dubbed “Nairobbery?” Were matatus not regularly car-jacked and thugs controlled the night in both rural and urban areas?

The most incredulous reaction to the Saba Saba plans is the suggestion that it is — as it was in 1990 — coded language for regime change!

So let’s go back to July 1990. By this time, a burgeoning opposition mass movement had been growing, fuelled by the heavy handedness of President Moi’s regime.

Dozens had been tortured at Nyayo House, massacres had been committed in Wagalla, corruption was everywhere, and every key position in the regime, or the deputy, was occupied by “Home Boys.”

The 1988 mlolongo elections were especially crucial in bolstering discontent as unpopular politicians were sent to Parliament, solely because of their sycophancy to President Moi.

The February 1990 assassination of Robert Ouko, an articulate defender of the Moi regime, made things worse. For if such a loyal and competent defender of the regime could be so brutally killed, no one was safe.

MISGOVERNING BY JUBILEE

Thus Saba Saba was about sending a message that Kenyans were fed up with the autocratic, corrupt and torturous ways of the Moi regime.

The rallying cry was for pluralism, through the repealing of Section 2A of the constitution that made Kenya a one-party state, and for constitutional reform. It was about reclaiming Kenya’s sovereignty from the ruling elite in a peaceful, people-driven mass movement, with mass action as its primary tool.

The Moi regime’s reaction increased Saba Saba’s popularity. They declared it illegal, deployed overwhelming force and used strong arm tactics, including insults and intimidation, and detaining without trial Kenneth Matiba, Raila Odinga and Charles Rubia.

But the sum effect of all this was that wananchi came out in their thousands, risking life, limb and liberty. And it was this courage that made Saba Saba a game changer and fixture in our history.

We are seeing similar tactics as we approach this year’s Saba Saba. Venom and vitriol abound against Odinga and the opposition, including using the presidential platform to make dubious accusations of involvement in terrorism, ironically heightening support.

Make no mistake: the recent surge of Raila Odinga, including his elevation to “Baba”, is more about the missteps, lack of focus and misgoverning by Jubilee than it is about anything Odinga has done or is doing.

He is simply symbolic of a desire for another way of governing that would be inclusive, focused, mature, pro-devolution, pro-human rights, pro-people and anti-corruption. Of course, these hopes in Odinga may not germinate and he could turn out to be just like everyone else we have had. But for now — whether we like him or not — he is that symbol just as Matiba, Rubia and Jaramogi Oginga Odinga were in 1990.

And just like in 1990, hardline, intolerant actions and statements by regime supporters — such as “banning” rallies — as Saba Saba approaches, not only increase tensions, they also increase its popularity.