Kenya voted for change and got it…at the local level
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Elisabeth Janaina
Aug 19, 2017, 3:01:35 AM8/19/17
to southsudankob
Kenya voted for change and got it…at the local level
By Hannah Waddilove
August 18, 2017
0
Share:
Over half of Kenya’s incumbent governors, 62% of its MPs and 79% of
its women representatives lost their seats at the ballot box.
Kenya election rally. Credit: Commonwealth Secretariat.
A 2017 election rally in Uhuru Park, Nairobi. Credit: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Since voting day on 8 August, news about Kenya’s elections has
naturally focused on the outcome of the presidential race. This is
unsurprising, especially given that opposition candidate Raila Odinga
has disputed Uhuru Kenyatta’s victory and promised to submit a legal
challenge.
However, the spotlight on the presidency does not necessarily reflect
where most people’s attentions were during the campaign and on
Election Day.
In many parts of the country, party agents, supporters and, to some
extent, returning officers appeared more invested – both personally
and politically – in the results of the local races than in the battle
for the top job. At least in some areas, party representatives
primarily turned up at polling stations to “protect the vote” for
candidates hoping to be governors, MPs or members of constituency
assembly (MCAs) rather than president.
At some constituency tallying centres, throngs of supporters waited to
hear the results of local races. They celebrated jubilantly if their
candidates won, but had often vacated the centre by the time the
presidential result was announced.
In a few instances, when the audience had thinned to just a few
observers, media and security personnel, officials did not even bother
to read out the presidential tallies. As one returning officer
explained, “I announce the local races first because that is what
people are here for”.
Spreading power
While the international media has typically focused on the
presidential contest, voters have been more focused on local results
in 2017 largely because of the effects of devolution. The inauguration
of a new constitution in 2010 reduced the powers of the “imperial
presidency” and distributed resources and political authority more
widely down the political pyramid, as explained here by Nanjala
Nyabola.
As part of the changes, Kenyans are now invited to vote across six
levels of government – for a president, governor, senator, MP, women’s
representative and MCA – rather than the previous three.
The first polls to be held under the new system were in 2013. In the
years since then, however, it has become ever clearer that the local
balance of power in Kenya’s new devolved system is vested largely in
the office of the governor and, for less wealthy candidates, in the
office of the MCA.
This realisation has led to far greater and more intense competition
for these seats. The number of candidates contesting to be MCAs, for
example, grew to 12,060 in 2017, up from 9,886 in 2013. Overall, Kenya
saw a record 15,082 individuals vying for power in the August
elections across all six levels.
The focus on local races by party agents and the like was particularly
apparent in areas that came out strongly for the opposition National
Super Alliance (NASA). The ruling Jubilee appears to have been more
successful in uniting behind individual party nominees. But in
NASA-supporting areas, members of different opposition parties within
the coalition often fought each other tooth and nail for local
positions, despite backing the same presidential candidate.
It should also be noted that local contests tended to get more
attention where the presidential vote was less competitive. In fact,
the presidential race only appears to have been tight – closer than
60-40 at least – in 12 of Kenya’s 47 counties.
One-term wonders
As well as making local races more competitive, devolution also seems
to have made securing local votes more complicated. Jubilee’s campaign
strategies, which saw the ruling party win 25 governorships compared
to 18 in 2013, proved more effective than NASA’s. But incumbents from
both parties struggled to be re-elected. While official results backed
by paperwork are still pending, the local races have been more
noteworthy for losses rather than gains.
Of 47 county governors, for example, 24 incumbents look set to lose
their seats. Notable losses include Nairobi Governor Evans Kidero of
Odinga’s Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) and Bomet Governor Isaac
Rutto, one of NASA’s five principals. As with presidential results,
several losing governors have alleged rigging.
For MCAs, very few incumbents were re-elected. In Mombasa, for
example, several failed to win their party’s nomination at the primary
stage, and only 8 out of 30 sitting MCAs were returned. Many races at
this level were also won with significantly less than 50% of the vote,
indicating a high level of competition.
In the National Assembly, 179 MPs – or about 62% of the 290-seat body
– look to have lost their jobs, continuing a trend of Kenya’s
incumbent MPs failing to stay in power. Meanwhile, nearly 80% of
county women representatives failed to win another term.
What this means is that while President Kenyatta may continue to
occupy State House, the corridors of power across the country will be
filled with many more new faces than old ones. In the myriad races
being contested around Kenya, citizens mostly voted for change, and
got it.
This level of renewal may be a positive outcome in terms of
devolution’s promises of greater democracy. It may be less useful,
however, in terms of creating enduring centres of power away from the
national executive.
Local choices
Observations from the constituency level along with the high level of
turnover for incumbents suggest that devolution has further empowered
voters to make their own choices in local races, extending a long-time
feature of Kenya’s parliamentary contests.
An essential element of the 2010 constitution was to distribute
resources regionally in a bid to stabilise the multi-ethnic country.
The first term after devolution and the levels of local engagement in
the 2017 election suggest progress in that direction.
This is not to say that there is now equality in the distribution of
public goods at the local level. In many counties, the new system has
re-created patterns of inclusion and exclusion long practised at the
national level. But the high proportion of incumbents failing to
retain their seats – especially at the important level of governor –
indicates that citizens are utilising their political voting power to
oust those who have disappointed in office.
By Hannah Waddilove
August 18, 2017
0
Share:
Over half of Kenya’s incumbent governors, 62% of its MPs and 79% of
its women representatives lost their seats at the ballot box.
Kenya election rally. Credit: Commonwealth Secretariat.
A 2017 election rally in Uhuru Park, Nairobi. Credit: Commonwealth Secretariat.
Since voting day on 8 August, news about Kenya’s elections has
naturally focused on the outcome of the presidential race. This is
unsurprising, especially given that opposition candidate Raila Odinga
has disputed Uhuru Kenyatta’s victory and promised to submit a legal
challenge.
However, the spotlight on the presidency does not necessarily reflect
where most people’s attentions were during the campaign and on
Election Day.
In many parts of the country, party agents, supporters and, to some
extent, returning officers appeared more invested – both personally
and politically – in the results of the local races than in the battle
for the top job. At least in some areas, party representatives
primarily turned up at polling stations to “protect the vote” for
candidates hoping to be governors, MPs or members of constituency
assembly (MCAs) rather than president.
At some constituency tallying centres, throngs of supporters waited to
hear the results of local races. They celebrated jubilantly if their
candidates won, but had often vacated the centre by the time the
presidential result was announced.
In a few instances, when the audience had thinned to just a few
observers, media and security personnel, officials did not even bother
to read out the presidential tallies. As one returning officer
explained, “I announce the local races first because that is what
people are here for”.
Spreading power
While the international media has typically focused on the
presidential contest, voters have been more focused on local results
in 2017 largely because of the effects of devolution. The inauguration
of a new constitution in 2010 reduced the powers of the “imperial
presidency” and distributed resources and political authority more
widely down the political pyramid, as explained here by Nanjala
Nyabola.
As part of the changes, Kenyans are now invited to vote across six
levels of government – for a president, governor, senator, MP, women’s
representative and MCA – rather than the previous three.
The first polls to be held under the new system were in 2013. In the
years since then, however, it has become ever clearer that the local
balance of power in Kenya’s new devolved system is vested largely in
the office of the governor and, for less wealthy candidates, in the
office of the MCA.
This realisation has led to far greater and more intense competition
for these seats. The number of candidates contesting to be MCAs, for
example, grew to 12,060 in 2017, up from 9,886 in 2013. Overall, Kenya
saw a record 15,082 individuals vying for power in the August
elections across all six levels.
The focus on local races by party agents and the like was particularly
apparent in areas that came out strongly for the opposition National
Super Alliance (NASA). The ruling Jubilee appears to have been more
successful in uniting behind individual party nominees. But in
NASA-supporting areas, members of different opposition parties within
the coalition often fought each other tooth and nail for local
positions, despite backing the same presidential candidate.
It should also be noted that local contests tended to get more
attention where the presidential vote was less competitive. In fact,
the presidential race only appears to have been tight – closer than
60-40 at least – in 12 of Kenya’s 47 counties.
One-term wonders
As well as making local races more competitive, devolution also seems
to have made securing local votes more complicated. Jubilee’s campaign
strategies, which saw the ruling party win 25 governorships compared
to 18 in 2013, proved more effective than NASA’s. But incumbents from
both parties struggled to be re-elected. While official results backed
by paperwork are still pending, the local races have been more
noteworthy for losses rather than gains.
Of 47 county governors, for example, 24 incumbents look set to lose
their seats. Notable losses include Nairobi Governor Evans Kidero of
Odinga’s Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) and Bomet Governor Isaac
Rutto, one of NASA’s five principals. As with presidential results,
several losing governors have alleged rigging.
For MCAs, very few incumbents were re-elected. In Mombasa, for
example, several failed to win their party’s nomination at the primary
stage, and only 8 out of 30 sitting MCAs were returned. Many races at
this level were also won with significantly less than 50% of the vote,
indicating a high level of competition.
In the National Assembly, 179 MPs – or about 62% of the 290-seat body
– look to have lost their jobs, continuing a trend of Kenya’s
incumbent MPs failing to stay in power. Meanwhile, nearly 80% of
county women representatives failed to win another term.
What this means is that while President Kenyatta may continue to
occupy State House, the corridors of power across the country will be
filled with many more new faces than old ones. In the myriad races
being contested around Kenya, citizens mostly voted for change, and
got it.
This level of renewal may be a positive outcome in terms of
devolution’s promises of greater democracy. It may be less useful,
however, in terms of creating enduring centres of power away from the
national executive.
Local choices
Observations from the constituency level along with the high level of
turnover for incumbents suggest that devolution has further empowered
voters to make their own choices in local races, extending a long-time
feature of Kenya’s parliamentary contests.
An essential element of the 2010 constitution was to distribute
resources regionally in a bid to stabilise the multi-ethnic country.
The first term after devolution and the levels of local engagement in
the 2017 election suggest progress in that direction.
This is not to say that there is now equality in the distribution of
public goods at the local level. In many counties, the new system has
re-created patterns of inclusion and exclusion long practised at the
national level. But the high proportion of incumbents failing to
retain their seats – especially at the important level of governor –
indicates that citizens are utilising their political voting power to
oust those who have disappointed in office.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages