THE REASON WHY CORD CALL FOR REFERENDUM WILL FAIL

BY AMHEDNASIR ABDULLAHI The tribal, egocentric and primitive politics that defines our situation is with us again. Five months after a General Election, the country, against the wishes of the majority of Kenyans, is being edged into another senseless and divisive agitation. In a political setup in which ordinary Kenyans are voiceless, indeed pawns in the endless and ruthless pursuit of power and wealth by their tribal leaders, we see Cord and its leaders hitting the campaign trail, emotionally advocating an overhaul of the Constitution. Their robotic tribesmen, with closed eyes, have jumped into the bandwagon. They fervently agree that, indeed, a Constitution that does not give their leader a smooth sail or an advantage to win the presidency one final time is not a worthy Constitution. We see, in front of our eyes, a sudden rationalisation to change the constitution. It’s a no brainer and it will end in another disaster, defeat and despair. We are duty bound, as rational Kenyans, to warn and advise these agitators for constitutional change that this pursuit of individual-centric politics is a relic of the past, a blatant case of hero-worship and a selfish pursuit of individual glory at the expense of public good. The agitation to change the Constitution is a consequence of Cord leaders’ refusal to agree that on March 4, Kenyans made a choice as to their leaders. That choice was a constitutional mandate for Uhuru Kenyatta and William Ruto to rule and reign. Prior to the elections, not many Kenyan politicians saw the need to change the Constitution. The document was roundly praised and, indeed, it is a very practical and progressive Constitution. It must be remembered that it has taken us about 25 years to get the current Constitution. It passed in the second referendum. Billions of shillings were spent in the process. It is the final product of delicate tribal and political negotiations. And Kenyans ratified it overwhelmingly in a referendum. If Ruto was leading the call for constitutional change, many Kenyans would have given him a chance to state his reasons. His call would also have been viewed favourably. He would have been seen as an honest and decent man whose agitation to change the Constitution was genuine. But Ruto opposed the constitution and led with gusto the “No” campaign. He pointed to a number of weaknesses that needed change and suggested improvement. When his team was defeated in the referendum, he accepted the wishes of the majority. Raila Odinga, on the other hand, is one politician who can lay a proprietary claim to the form and substance of the constitution. His views and political aspirations were taken into consideration at every turn in the constitution making process. His advisers made sure that Raila’s grand goal to become president was not derailed by the constitution. I challenge Kenyans to read the views of his lieutenants and sidekicks in the Naivasha retreats on the making of the Constitution. In so far as the political aspects of the Constitution, it was literally tailor-made for him. Political power is the end process of a constitutional process. The March election turned on its head the delicate constitutional engineering experiment undertaken by Raila. It both imploded and exploded. The numbers didn’t add up. How do you address a mathematical problem that doesn’t add up? Raila has a simple solution: Change the Constitution and try one final time a parliamentary system. The agitation to change the Constitution underlines a pathetic and sorry state of affairs. Instead of agitating for a parliamentary system, my advice to this brigade is to go straight to the result they seek to achieve through the constitutional change. Simply draft a constitutional provision that reads that the IEBC will declare Raila the winner when he contests the presidency next time! That will save us a lot of trouble!