The Building Bridges Initiative (BBI)

                                                 A CASE OF POLITICAL SYCOPHANCY:

                                                             THE KENYAN TRAGEDY

Sycophancy has been exemplified as a beggarly cajolery demeanor that is anticipated at attaining a bit of preference. In Athens, Sycophancy has its root in the statutory scheme; In that, the Athenians were devoted to their scheme of trendy courts and understood that lawsuit could be a prerequisite for safeguarding the “rights” and property of citizens and protecting the public interest, they were also acutely conscious that litigation could be abused and exploited for private ends. Like the citizens of modern democracies, Athenians had to come to terms with the fact that the legal process can be used not only as a means of obtaining justice but as a weapon for achieving narrowly selfish ends. In making constitutional amendments, those who seek these vicissitudes must signpost the skirmishes that they desire to resolve. In their itinerary, first is the ontological actuality of an existent operation or action. Its end may be good or evil and thus its first valuation. In addition, the one resounding out the action may have an aim for which he performs such an action which may be good or evil thus adding a second layer of moral assessment. Finally, the statuses, the accidental or concomitant factors that surround an action may vary its moral value independently of the intention of the acting person.

In Kenya, ten years after the promulgation of the 2010 constitution there have been yet appealed for a constitutional moment. Front-runners across all cliques have come together and indicated the need to have changes that will resolve several issues. His Excellency, Uhuru Kenyatta, and the chief opposition leader Raila Odinga after the infamous 9 March 2018 handshake have been on the forefront. Their calls for a constitutional change are informed by their nine-point agenda that found the memorandum of understanding (MOU) known as the Building Bridges Initiative (BBI).

Ethnic antipathy and rivalry 

In Kenya, ethnic disunion is indisputably the worst and most deep-rooted of Kenya’s hitches. The relationship between communities has waned with time slipping into a dreadful setup of ‘us against them’. This has seen communities bellicosely challenge others and engage in ghoulish rivalry. President Uhuru Kenyatta and Raila Odinga aim at crafting a new Kenya with a favorable milieu in which Kenyans can engage in hale and hearty competition bereft of ethnic profiling.

Divisive election 

In Kenya, polls have proven to be very controversial. The election cycle in Kenya has awkwardly tended to be characterized by vehemence, treachery, and lack of transparency. Consequently, it impacts investment, fiscal activity, and eventually a danger to human life. Millions of Kenyans lose their jobs and livelihoods in the run-up to elections, consequently, the tension within the country destabilizes economic, social, and political stability. With the help of BBI, Kenya should be able to overcome the negative cycle by understanding that in itself, an election is not the solution to the national challenges. That as a people, we ought to adhere to the constitution and the laws of the land. It is the only way that we will make it to bring an end to ethnic antagonism, profiling while in the same manner trying to promote inclusivity, devolution, and transparency. 

The primary essence of the drafters of the 2010 constitution was to address certain potent issues that had hindered the growth of Kenyan democracy, One;

 The sovereignty of the people and the supremacy of the constitution

Given that democracy rests on the authority and choice of a people, the celebrated constitution was meant to address the past injustices that had been committed by the state to its people. The supremacy of the constitution was spelled down in the rule of law. That a country had a specified set of rules that it should operate on. This then ensured equality, freedom, and liberty of all citizens

The 2010 constitution stipulated the roles of the legislature and the executive

In doing so, it ensured that there were minimal cases of dictatorial kind of governance that the country had risked falling into. In outlining the roles of the president and his deputy, the Kenyan constitution aimed at limiting the excessive power that the initial president had. The legislature was also freed from manipulation by the state by outlining its roles, authority, and limits.

Citizenship

The Kenyan constitution took to clarify the entitlement of citizens, retention, and acquisition of citizenship, and revocation of citizenship. This was a result of many citizens that were forced into exile because of their criticism of the state and its dictatorial operations in the early 70s. This was in line with the bill of rights that outlined the rights of each person. It ensured many fundamental rights and freedom, its application, implementation, and enforcement of these laws. This then allowed the creation of various institutions that would help realize the concepts of equality, human dignity, privacy, and freedom.

Term limit

The constant change of leadership through elections that forms the backbone of democracy then drove the 2010 constitution into addressing the fundamental aspect of representation of the people. The representation of a people involved the electoral system and its process, legislation on the election, basic requirements for political parties and the electoral body its delimitation of electoral units. This was due to the sham elections and many of the election irregularities that the country had experienced under the past regime which led to violence.

Devolution

In choosing a devolved system of governance, the 2010 constitution set out and mechanism of governance that will seek to attain and promote regional balance in the country. It was time the Kenyan government changed its mode of operation. 

Before the adoption of the 2010 constitution, governments rolled out development in areas that were perceived to be their strongholds. This mode/system of development worked against other regions. These regions were left to languish in poverty and underdeveloped. Regional balance that was sort under the 2010 constitution, in the long run, would then propel the country into attaining equality of all citizens. This was to be achieved and anchored in law.

Inclusivity 

Winner takes all mechanism has been the greatest undoing of our democracy. It has violated democratic principles. Democracy is simply a system of government where the citizens exercise power and have the right to elect government representatives who collectively create a government body for the entire nation. After the start with a handshake that 'united' the country, today Kenya is at stake of falling apart, 14 months to the general elections. The fallout is squarely on the 'power greed' of top political players. 

The BBI Greed

After the disputed 2013 general election, many Kenyans have never forgiven Dr. Willy Mutunga, the then Chief Justice for that terse judgment on the 2013 election petition. Now, the high court has delivered one of the best researched and erudite judgments on BBI. But they are still not happy - because they have changed goalposts. Serving Kenyans is difficult.

I remember that morning at KICC when leaders went to append signatures in support of the document only to realize later that it had been amended and sections relating to IEBC reform had been deleted. I am certain you all will remember the embarrassing spectacle at the signature launch when Raila gave a speech promising reforms in the IEBC, yet that no longer existed in the BBI document. But if electoral reforms no longer formed part of BBI, why were we pushing it forward? I guess you’ve read reports of how the printing of the BBI report was marred with deceit. Maj (Rt) Seii acknowledged this as much—a different set of BBI documents secretly printed by state actors and released.

More precisely, if elections and management of elections are no longer the priority of BBI what is so urgent about it (re’ the 70 constituencies) that we must do before 2022?

Interestingly, when James Orengo SC cautioned us about the pitfalls in the BBI path, he was told to stop kizungu mingi. A few weeks letter the High Court bench spoke Orengo’s language. 

The ODM cartel wing pretended not to know what the judges said about the BBI bill is what James Orengo and Otiende Amollo were telling us. Weak-kneed political paper tigers turned it into a contest of empty loyalty to Raila Odinga, the ODM party leader. 

The courts lifted the veil on BBI greed for the entire country to see who was manipulating the process to their benefit and found the additional constituencies to be skewed distributed. There were absolutely NO electoral reforms (what BBI was premised on) in sneaking 70 constituencies into the BBI bill. It is least to say bad manners. It’s GREED. It also shows the shameless lengths State actors went to usurp these functions of IEBC. Why would anyone sneak additional items inside a national document for their gain at the expense of the entire nation?

Uhuru’s people in their wisdom or lack of it decided that the only way BBI made sense to their constituents is if they gave themselves more than half the constituencies they wanted to be created. The creation of the office of the Prime Minister was touted as one of the steps to broaden the leadership space and rid the country of winner-take-all politics. The additional constituencies gave Central Kenya the obvious advantage to produce the PM.

Orengo wasn’t at cross-purposes with anyone. He questioned the legality & distribution of the additional 70 new Constituencies that were sneaked into the bill by you-know-who out of GREED. His qualified stance was far superior to the unrelenting greed of Raila’s friends

If violence erupts after elections because of poll fraud, why introduce "new constituencies" with a majority in one region to "address" poll theft?

The BBI was then changed and made a succession WEAPON. Uhuru and his people sought to tether the Presidency with a short rope so that while they create the impression of having given it to a Luhya or Kalenjin, they can watch it from their compounds and recall it when they want to.

Why should the Mt Kenya region get the largest share of the constituencies at 17 while the remaining 53 constituencies are distributed among the rest of the 20 counties? This was skewed up. Mt. Kenya isn't the only region in Kenya. All regions are equal

If the perennial problem of the country was a skewed system that allocated state resources via a tribal industrial complex that marginalized all others, why would BBI be an enabler of the same? Shocking right? But it all shouts GREED.

This then begs the question, where was the Building Bridges Initiative in this? How are we building bridges of national relations and electoral reforms by distributing 70 new constituencies? 

What’s coming out is that Mt Kenya devised an affirmative action formula that could double the number of parliamentary seats from the current one as outlined in our 2010 Constitution. They defended it. They loved it.

Another very dangerous proposal is the creation of an IMPERIAL Presidency. I find the inclusion of this clause in the BBI bill very strange given that it is being associated with Raila, who has suffered so much under rogue leadership, you would imagine he would be the fiercest warrior against such recklessness

History has a better illustration of the pitfalls of changing a constitution to fix a short-term problem. Under Kenyan history, President Moi schemed a change of the constitution to bar Jaramogi Odinga and George Anyona from registering a party to compete with Kanu.

Debating in Parliament, Charles Njonjo waxed lyrical. He boasted that they would sleep comfortably that night knowing no one can register a competing political party. On his part, Kibaki said Moi was a good leader and should be “protected by law” from the unnecessary competition.

Barely one year later, Njonjo was out of government. He chose to keep off politics forever. One of the reasons for the decision to keep off politics was ‘SHAME’ – of having single-handedly authored tyranny. He had thought he would inherit the office of President “soon”

Kibaki remained the Vice President but was constantly humiliated through official harassment of his friends. All government officials were barred from inviting Kibaki for any function to lower his national profile. This made Kenyans think of him as a tribalist who hated other parts of Kenya.

Kibaki was reduced to doing harambees for churches in the Nyeri district. In those years, whenever news of Kibaki came on TV, Kenyans would sarcastically pre-empt the venue of Kibaki’s function before deliriously calling him “the Vice President for Othaya.”

Being a senior servant in the government, he was inclined to loyalty. He once scorned at calls for many parties as an attempt to cut mugumo tree with a razor blade. Yet his dying career was resurrected after section 2A was removed. Only then he managed to resign from the government and form a political party.

Kibaki and Njonjo enacted section 2A; each hoping to inherit the imperial powers “at some point”. They became the main victims. I bet they would not have done it if they knew what lay ahead. Proponents of the imperial presidency in BBI better watch out.

The perils of a powerful Presidency are legion. It can kill a nation; we are where we are because of it. Once the President is above the law, all the national processes operate at his ego. And they are mostly abused to serve narrow interests and settle personal and business scores. (JUSTICE ON TRIAL- THE KOIGI CASE)

Still on the imperial presidency. Why would a sitting president propose such a radical clause in a constitution that is meant to ‘build bridges?’ 

Jostein Gaarder a writer of a novel, Sophie’s World states that if you are changing national laws, it should start with the assumption that you will die immediately. And that you will arise in the same world but you do not know what your position will be in that society– socially, ethnically, economically, or politically. ONLY THEN CAN WE TRUST YOU TO MAKE LAWS

In other words, you can only change the law rationally when you have no immediate interest in any office. Law changes by leaders in power demonstrate a total lack of good faith and statesmanship. Such Crafty maneuvers and rash gambling with a nation does not befit Raila Odinga.

For Kenyans supporting BBI, remember: - NO ONE KNOWS TOMORROW. And one year in politics is LONG. We are much safer with the current constitution. If there is a need to change it, politicians in power or aspiring power are not the right people. It’s fundamentally a flawed process.

Look at the arrogance of the Jubilee MPs after the 2017 elections. They even pleaded with Uhuru to become a dictator and deal with “Raila and Luos.” What’s the position of these MPs today?

My biggest concern and a fundamental question to the BBI supporters, what is Uhuru Kenyatta’s interest in BBI? Health services are grounded; KEMSA was looted in the middle of a pandemic but he was not bothered, he is not bothered. But he is determined to change laws and even uses 4 billion from broke coffers to bribe MCAs to pass it. Not alarmed?

And to Raila Odinga- Why would Uhuru be interested in an imperial Presidency when he is (hopefully) leaving the office? Is it because he wants his successor to rule better? Is there any single thing Uhuru wanted to do but was hamstrung by “katiba?” 

As Malcom X affirms on the truth, “I’m for truth, no matter who tells it. I’m for justice, no matter who it is for or against. I’m a human being first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever or whatever benefits humanity as a whole” There has be no hinderance that the president has met concerning the 2010 constitution which would warrant a constitutional moment in Kenya, 10 years after it was adopted. 

In Kenya, when elections are stolen, it’s sanitized by "God's chosen..." when they mean god selected. Angry citizens respond, they ask them to accept and move on. Then they say BBI will fix it. But their greed knows no limit

BBI is unpopular because we are approaching a divisive election without an ounce of electoral reforms. It is unpopular because it is a tool of GREED.

BBI is unpopular because those who have been comfortable running the country under the imperial presidency with its attendant exclusivity, now want others to divide the executive into PMs and DPMs too.

Truthfully, BBI is so unpopular right now because GREED took over and state actors tried to create constituencies in a way that would enable them to control parliament and the state even after 2022. I bet you’ve heard “Uhuru is still young to retire” calls.

Why would Uhuru move on to make IEBC changes on a whim, if their Handshake on 8th March 2018 was borne of a desire to correct the injustices occasioned by poor electoral systems?

Also, why would Uhuru arbitrarily appoint a selection panel for IEBC commissioners in the middle of the BBI process, instead of having a more inclusive appointment process enshrined in BBI?

Those who made BBI a vessel of GREED are responsible for its death. Let it be buried in a shallow unmarked grave. If BBI dies, (I so want it to) it will have died after a long battle with GREED, bravely borne.

Our friends from the mountain are wondering why the High Court ruling doesn’t seem to have irked Raila’s base. They are wondering why top lawyers are not giving judges the rocket. Well, we know who wanted many additional constituencies and a tether on the Presidency.