Why so tense? Kenya’s high stake elections explained
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Elisabeth Janaina
May 13, 2017, 1:11:19 AM5/13/17
to southsudankob
Why so tense? Kenya’s high stake elections explained
By Sekou Toure Otondi
May 9, 2017
0
Share:
Historical score-settling, future succession and the state of the
economy are all to play for on 8 August.
Kenya elections
Uhuru Kenyatta’s motorcade drives past supporters in the 2013 election
campaign. Credit: SarahTz.
After the 2007 general election, Kenya experienced its worst
politically triggered ethnic violence since independence. The violence
was caused by a dispute between the two main presidential candidates:
Raila Odinga and his opposition Orange Democratic Movement; and Mwai
Kibaki, who was defending his seat on a Party of National Unity
ticket.
But this was not the first time Kenya experienced violence around a
general election. Since the reintroduction of multiparty politics in
1992, ethnic violence has repeatedly reared its ugly head around
election time. Even in elections that were considered peaceful, as was
the case in 2002 and 2013, the threat of politically-instigated ethnic
violence remained real.
It is within this historical context of unpredictability that the
upcoming general elections – and specifically the presidential
elections – need to be understood.
The run up to the 8 August general election is again expected to be
characterised by palpable tensions, particularly in the race for the
presidency.
[How to undermine Africa’s independent media]
High stakes
One of the issues that fuelled tensions and led to violence in 2007
was a lack of trust in the court system. There could well be a repeat
of this come 8 August. The official opposition has already questioned
the institutions charged with conducting elections and resolving
election disputes: namely, the judiciary and the election agency known
as the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).
Three additional factors are increasing the tension.
Firstly, President Uhuru Kenyatta is keen to avoid the tag of being
Kenya’s first one-term president.
On the other side of the aisle, Raila Odinga – a perennial opposition
presidential candidate – is making what is widely seen as his last
stab at the presidency. The stakes are high for both candidates.
[It’s time to axe Kenya’s big dick politics]
The second factor has to do with the post-2017 presidential
“succession plan”. Neither Odinga nor Kenyatta are expected to be on
the ballot in 2022. By law Kenyatta is bound to step down after two
terms, and Odinga has indicated that he will be a one-term president.
The stakes are therefore high not just for 2017 but also for the 2022
presidency race.
Given the fluidity of Kenyan politics and the penchant for political
parties to form alliances based on ethnic calculations, there is no
guarantee that both deputies − William Ruto and Stephen Kalonzo
Musyoka − will face off in the 2022. The shift in political alliances
may even result in the two deputies working together. In fact, the two
main hopefuls in the current race for presidency, as well as their
deputies, have at one time been in the same camp.
The third factor has to do with dynasties. The 2017 presidential poll
is likely to be the final duel between the Kenyatta and Odinga
dynasties. The two families have dominated Kenyan politics for more
than half a century.
Uhuru’s father, Jomo Kenyatta, was Kenya’s first president. Raila’s
father, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, was Kenya’s first vice-president. The
two leaders broke ranks in 1966 following the elder Odinga’s ouster
from the ruling KANU over ideological and personal differences.
The rift between the families has never healed. The upcoming election
can be interpreted as the final battle in settling the long-standing
political score between the Odinga and Kenyatta scions.
What matters for ordinary Kenyans
For ordinary Kenyans, the economy is a key factor. The economic
welfare of the majority of Kenyans has worsened despite promises by
the current administration to reduce the prices of basic commodities
and increase their socioeconomic wellbeing.
By the end of April 2017 inflation stood at 11.48%, according to data
from Kenya Bureau of Statistics. That is well above the Central Bank
inflation ceiling of 7.8%.
High unemployment is also a problem. According to the most recent
United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Index report,
Kenya, at 39.1%, has the highest rate of unemployment in the region.
The election may also swing on runaway corruption. Since 2013, graft
has been more visible than in previous administrations. In its 2016
Corruption Perception index, Transparency International ranked Kenya
145 out of 176 countries – a drop of six places from 2015.
[Kenya has become a “bandit economy”, says Chief Justice Willy Mutunga]
[Campaigners warn of Kenya’s ‘secretive’ plan to set up International
Financial Centre]
Can Kenya avoid a repeat?
Although the 2010 constitution opened up county governments as the new
frontier for political power struggles, the presidency is without
doubt Kenya’s most coveted elective seat. If the presidential election
is mismanaged, tensions are likely to escalate into ethno-political
violence.
To avoid a repeat of the 2007-2008 post-election violence, key
stakeholders and existing institutions must be on high alert. This is
particularly true of the institutions tasked with ensuring peaceful
elections.
The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission has a particularly
large responsibility given that it is the main institution charged
with conducting the elections. It must gain the trust of actors across
the political divide.
As things stand, the official opposition has expressed reservations
about the commission’s neutrality, efficiency and readiness to conduct
elections. These tensions have been playing out in the High Court. The
main contention currently between IEBC and opposition is the 7 April
High Court ruling which decided that constituencies would be the final
voter-tallying centres.
Another factor likely to trip up the commission is the amended
election law. This allows it to activate a manual backup system should
the electronic voter identification and transmission system
malfunction.
The main reason for grounding the electronic system in law was to
prevent the election malpractices cited in the Kriegler Report
following the 2007 election. Resorting to a manual system could open
the door for voter numbers to be manipulated.
The opposition also has little faith in the judiciary. The courts have
repeatedly assured Kenyans of their readiness to handle presidential
election petitions. But scepticism persists.
Despite the tensions, Kenya is in better shape than it was in 2007.
But it remains dangerously close to the precipice. The 2017 elections
will once again test the country’s legal framework and institutional
capability to undertake credible, free, fair and peaceful elections.
If it does, Kenya will have continued to consolidate its future as a
democracy. A shambolic election will take the country back to its
traditional history of anxiety and unpredictability around each
election cycle.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the
original article. The Conversation
By Sekou Toure Otondi
May 9, 2017
0
Share:
Historical score-settling, future succession and the state of the
economy are all to play for on 8 August.
Kenya elections
Uhuru Kenyatta’s motorcade drives past supporters in the 2013 election
campaign. Credit: SarahTz.
After the 2007 general election, Kenya experienced its worst
politically triggered ethnic violence since independence. The violence
was caused by a dispute between the two main presidential candidates:
Raila Odinga and his opposition Orange Democratic Movement; and Mwai
Kibaki, who was defending his seat on a Party of National Unity
ticket.
But this was not the first time Kenya experienced violence around a
general election. Since the reintroduction of multiparty politics in
1992, ethnic violence has repeatedly reared its ugly head around
election time. Even in elections that were considered peaceful, as was
the case in 2002 and 2013, the threat of politically-instigated ethnic
violence remained real.
It is within this historical context of unpredictability that the
upcoming general elections – and specifically the presidential
elections – need to be understood.
The run up to the 8 August general election is again expected to be
characterised by palpable tensions, particularly in the race for the
presidency.
[How to undermine Africa’s independent media]
High stakes
One of the issues that fuelled tensions and led to violence in 2007
was a lack of trust in the court system. There could well be a repeat
of this come 8 August. The official opposition has already questioned
the institutions charged with conducting elections and resolving
election disputes: namely, the judiciary and the election agency known
as the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC).
Three additional factors are increasing the tension.
Firstly, President Uhuru Kenyatta is keen to avoid the tag of being
Kenya’s first one-term president.
On the other side of the aisle, Raila Odinga – a perennial opposition
presidential candidate – is making what is widely seen as his last
stab at the presidency. The stakes are high for both candidates.
[It’s time to axe Kenya’s big dick politics]
The second factor has to do with the post-2017 presidential
“succession plan”. Neither Odinga nor Kenyatta are expected to be on
the ballot in 2022. By law Kenyatta is bound to step down after two
terms, and Odinga has indicated that he will be a one-term president.
The stakes are therefore high not just for 2017 but also for the 2022
presidency race.
Given the fluidity of Kenyan politics and the penchant for political
parties to form alliances based on ethnic calculations, there is no
guarantee that both deputies − William Ruto and Stephen Kalonzo
Musyoka − will face off in the 2022. The shift in political alliances
may even result in the two deputies working together. In fact, the two
main hopefuls in the current race for presidency, as well as their
deputies, have at one time been in the same camp.
The third factor has to do with dynasties. The 2017 presidential poll
is likely to be the final duel between the Kenyatta and Odinga
dynasties. The two families have dominated Kenyan politics for more
than half a century.
Uhuru’s father, Jomo Kenyatta, was Kenya’s first president. Raila’s
father, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, was Kenya’s first vice-president. The
two leaders broke ranks in 1966 following the elder Odinga’s ouster
from the ruling KANU over ideological and personal differences.
The rift between the families has never healed. The upcoming election
can be interpreted as the final battle in settling the long-standing
political score between the Odinga and Kenyatta scions.
What matters for ordinary Kenyans
For ordinary Kenyans, the economy is a key factor. The economic
welfare of the majority of Kenyans has worsened despite promises by
the current administration to reduce the prices of basic commodities
and increase their socioeconomic wellbeing.
By the end of April 2017 inflation stood at 11.48%, according to data
from Kenya Bureau of Statistics. That is well above the Central Bank
inflation ceiling of 7.8%.
High unemployment is also a problem. According to the most recent
United Nations Development Programme’s Human Development Index report,
Kenya, at 39.1%, has the highest rate of unemployment in the region.
The election may also swing on runaway corruption. Since 2013, graft
has been more visible than in previous administrations. In its 2016
Corruption Perception index, Transparency International ranked Kenya
145 out of 176 countries – a drop of six places from 2015.
[Kenya has become a “bandit economy”, says Chief Justice Willy Mutunga]
[Campaigners warn of Kenya’s ‘secretive’ plan to set up International
Financial Centre]
Can Kenya avoid a repeat?
Although the 2010 constitution opened up county governments as the new
frontier for political power struggles, the presidency is without
doubt Kenya’s most coveted elective seat. If the presidential election
is mismanaged, tensions are likely to escalate into ethno-political
violence.
To avoid a repeat of the 2007-2008 post-election violence, key
stakeholders and existing institutions must be on high alert. This is
particularly true of the institutions tasked with ensuring peaceful
elections.
The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission has a particularly
large responsibility given that it is the main institution charged
with conducting the elections. It must gain the trust of actors across
the political divide.
As things stand, the official opposition has expressed reservations
about the commission’s neutrality, efficiency and readiness to conduct
elections. These tensions have been playing out in the High Court. The
main contention currently between IEBC and opposition is the 7 April
High Court ruling which decided that constituencies would be the final
voter-tallying centres.
Another factor likely to trip up the commission is the amended
election law. This allows it to activate a manual backup system should
the electronic voter identification and transmission system
malfunction.
The main reason for grounding the electronic system in law was to
prevent the election malpractices cited in the Kriegler Report
following the 2007 election. Resorting to a manual system could open
the door for voter numbers to be manipulated.
The opposition also has little faith in the judiciary. The courts have
repeatedly assured Kenyans of their readiness to handle presidential
election petitions. But scepticism persists.
Despite the tensions, Kenya is in better shape than it was in 2007.
But it remains dangerously close to the precipice. The 2017 elections
will once again test the country’s legal framework and institutional
capability to undertake credible, free, fair and peaceful elections.
If it does, Kenya will have continued to consolidate its future as a
democracy. A shambolic election will take the country back to its
traditional history of anxiety and unpredictability around each
election cycle.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the
original article. The Conversation
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages