Paza Sauti

Kenyan intellectuals have to lead the way in nationalist thinking

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Sun, 08 Jan 2012 00:36:00 +0000

As the presidential elections appear around the corner, Kenyans are getting anxious about how they are going to manage an election in a toxic political environment poisoned by ethnic animosity.

In such troubling times, the role of intellectuals is crucial: to help Kenyans clarify the issues, and to help them imagine a different scenario that would help us vote peacefully and with our conscience and intellect - as opposed to violently and according to our primal instincts.

Yet over the last few weeks, Kenya's two main dailies have carried unfortunate opinion articles in which educated Kenyans appear just as imprisoned in the tribal framework as the rest of the population.

In the East African Standard was a debate between Onyango Oloo and Ken Opande on the vote of the "Luo Nation." Oloo criticizes the Luo for failing to vote strategically and for instead voting the Odinga father and later the son almost to a man. Opande replied a few days later, criticizing Oloo for speaking against a community that is intelligent enough to speak for itself, after which he defends the community against accusations (which Oloo did not make) of the community being hostile to presidential candidates other than Raila.

Neither of the two writers noticed the absurdity of speaking of a "Luo Nation" when we shall be voting for the president of the Kenyan nation. And the argument that one can embrace their ethnicity and be Kenyan at the same time is not very helpful. That's because the choice Kenya is faced with is not between ethnicity and nationhood; it's between justice, law and care for our most challenged and vulnerable populations on one hand, and on the other impunity, corruption and arrogant disregard for Kenyans from impoverished regions.

Secondly, the two gentlemen assume that Luos voted for Jaramogi and Raila only because the two Odingas are Luo. Did they consider, especially Opande who defends the Luo as intelligent, that maybe those who overwhelmingly supported either Odinga also did so because they believed in what either stood for?

As a staunch admirer of Jaramogi, I think the pity is not that Luos voted for him; it is that other tribes didn't. And if those who voted for Jaramogi did so with conviction, rather than ethnic adrenaline, there is nothing to apologize for. Voting should be a declaration of what we stand for, not a lottery in which we hope that ours is the winning ticket to the State House. Oloo and Opande would have helped Kenyans if they would clarify the voting issues, so that Kenyans everywhere can see the diversity of issues and opinions, not just of ethnic groups.

A similarly unhelpful discussion was sparked by Hassan Omar Hassan's criticism of Kibaki's Kikuyu-centric government. Hassan has received many criticisms for spreading ethnic hatred, but I will respond to that of Koigi wa Wamwere. I resent Wamwere's articles because they are based on flawed reasoning and worse, he is given extensive space in the newspapers and politicians even quote him.

Yet Wamwere offers a shallow analysis of the complicated tribal quagmire in Kenya. His simplistic logic is that there are the Kikuyu elite and the poor Kikuyu. He normally doesn't say what Kenyans should do about the Kikuyu elite, but he says that the poor Kikuyus should not be banded together with the Kikuyu elite, and should be able to live and own land anywhere (he doesn't argue the same for poor from other ethnic groups).

What is frustrating about that argument, besides its flawed understanding of the intersection of economic class, gender and ethnicity, is the obsession with the innocence of Kikuyus from the lower classes, when that innocence is largely irrelevant.

It matters little whether the elite straddle across all ethnic groups; what matters is that they are exploiting us in the first place. No poor person gets food to eat and a roof over their head from knowing that poverty affects Kenyans from all ethnic groups. No bereaved person whose loved one died from poor medical attention is comforted by knowing that people from other communities die in the same way. No one suffering from injustice is consoled to know that it is not unique to their own ethnic group. There is no comfort in mediocrity and injustice just because the people who face it or perpetuate it are from all ethnic groups.

But Wamwere's criticism of Hassan proves that his constant defense of the Kikuyu non-elite is not just irrelevant; it is also tribalist. Wamwere rushed to defend Kikuyus even though Hassan had criticized Kibaki and not Kikuyus. Hassan condemned the impunity of the Kibaki government which is very Kikuyunized; which is very different from condemning the Kikuyu. Nowhere in the article did Hassan say that Kenya's next president should not be a Kikuyu; what he said was that most Kenyans will not want to vote a Kikuyu president because of the Kikuyu-centric poor leadership of Kibaki. So by defending the Kikuyu when Kibaki is criticized, Wamwere has done no different from the typical Kenyan politicians who, when criticized, say that it is their community which is being targeted.

Wamwere's article ends up being ethnocentric, despite the author's intentions, because it equates ethnocentrism to hatred and discrimination, when hatred and discrimination are merely the product of what Kenyans call tribalism. Ethnocentrism is a framework of viewing the world. In Kenya, it means interpreting everything in terms of a person's tribe. It means explaining someone's behavior or choices ONLY by the person's birth and never by the person's experience, ideas, belief, history and environment.

Tribalism is mediocrity, intellectual laziness and myopia, because one decides they don't need to know, learn or understand anything; they just need to look for the tribe. Tribalism is degrading because people no longer see themselves as human beings with a mind, body and soul; all they see of themselves and others is the blood running through their veins.

The promise of nationalism is therefore not the absence of tribalism. The promise of nationalism is the absence of this mediocrity. It is the ability to use our intellect and think creatively, to make wise political decisions and to love God and our fellow Kenyan. The promise of nationalism should be revolution which destroys the conditions that incubate our current vicious and voracious political elite. But the tragedy of nationalism shall be the failure of Kenyan thinkers to lead Kenyans in achieving that promise.

Posted January 6th, 2012 by Wandia Njoya in The Zeleza, African Affairs

noreply@blogger.com (Lumadede Adolwa) — Sat, 09 Jul 2011 02:35:00 +0000

Similarities between Senegal, Tanzania

allAfrica.com: Tanzania: Dar es Salaam's Tax Holidays Costing Economy Hundreds of Millions of Dollars

noreply@blogger.com (Lumadede Adolwa) — Tue, 22 Feb 2011 22:03:00 +0000

allAfrica.com: Tanzania: Dar es Salaam's Tax Holidays Costing Economy Hundreds of Millions of Dollars

Ujamaa and the Nyerere legacy: What went wrong?

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 02:29:00 +0000

By Joseph Mihangwa
26TH JANUARY 2011
It is on record that Mwalimu began thinking Socialism during his student days in Britain. He is quoted saying: “It would be surprising to find a progressive student in those days who did not think in terms of Socialism”.

But Mwalimu was not a Marxist, partly because Karl Marx was influenced by Darwinist racist theories that relegated African peoples to second-rate human beings. He also did not import European Socialism because it derived its arguments from class conflicts.

Mwalimu’s argument for African Socialism was summed up thus: “For a Third World country, once you have accepted the idea of Socialism, there is a problem of succumbing to the ideology of evolution. Marx says backward countries go through stages of development, with one stage leading to the other, and socialism is the product of developed capitalism”.

He goes on: “But it is very difficult for an intellectual to say I’ll engage myself in building capitalism in order to later go on to Socialism. So I felt we really have no choice at all if we are going to try and build socialism, we have to begin where we are…. And where we are is underdevelopment, not capitalism”.

When it came to applying African Socialism (Ujamaa) in Tanzania he says: “Although people wouldn’t believe it, we did not abolish capitalism. We gave it a less of a go-there wasn’t much capital around….In the meantime we have some African capitalists, actually we have what the Chinese call “nationalist capitalists” – sort of natural capitalists, although it is very difficult for them to survive without the tentacles of the transnationals”.

In the beginning, Mwalimu deliberately kept ideology out of the process of building TANU as a nationalist movement: “I thought if we get involved in ideologies, we’ll divide the people. I wanted to get rid of the British. That was far more important than thinking capitalism versus socialism”.

Mwalimu says the opportunity to formulate the socialist vision for Tanzania arose out of the need to solve a practical problem of social justice: “Before independence, the British used to give loans to the colonial officers to buy cars, but only to white staff. After independence, there was a lot of pressure on me to give car loans. I said no, but I’ll give loans to build houses. Later the facility was extended to politicians. One of them was my brother; he had built one house and was in the process of building another. I thought to myself they cannot do this, these fellows are becoming businessmen, simply selling houses…. So I thought I should produce a series of articles on self-reliance”.

Out of Mwalimu’s deliberations came “The Arusha Declaration for Self-reliance”, which he admits summarises the vision of the Tanzanian society which he wanted to build: “That was one of the best things we’ve ever done for this country. It gave clarity to what we were trying to do. People may now want to oppose it, they can oppose it. But they know what they are opposing”.

Several years before retirement, Mwalimu was asked for what he would best like to be remembered by his countrymen; his answer was: “For trying”.

As to the validity and relevance of the Declaration he said: “In the basic things, I would not change a thing. I do not think I would change the Arusha Declaration; with hindsight I would try to implement it differently, possibly in two areas”.

About nationalization, he said he would have nationalized carefully, or taken joint venture with the owners, rather than nationalize outright.

On rural policies, Mwalimu said, he would have turned down “Siasa ni Kilimo” (Agriculture is politics), the rallying cry of the Iringa Declaration that led to the not so popular “Villagisation”; Mwalimu laments: “I would have emphasized the family but encouraged the people to work together. We wasted too much energy trying to develop communal farming. We could have been more relaxed about it….. But the object would have been exactly the same”.

On the demise of the defunct East African Community in 1977, Mwalimu reveals that he had prior warned President Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya about the intrigues by the people around him. “But your people are destroying the Community”, he had told him. He notes that Jomo was committed to the Community, but he had some narrow-minded people around him.

He personally traces the cause of the Community’s collapse to Kenyans’ resentment of a strong fraternity between himself, Milton Obote of Uganda and Kenneth Kaunda of Zambia. He says: “Some fellows in Kenya felt isolated, and when I tried to get Zambia into the Community they felt it would become three to one. But they got it all wrong”.

Mwalimu reveals further that in any case the Community would have survived had it not been for the “chaotic situation in Uganda with Idi Amin there…. Tanzania and Uganda would have continued the Community, which would have meant not a breaking but withdrawal by Kenya; and Kenya would have not withdrawn”.

The other possible reason of the Community’s collapse was capitalist Kenya’s resentment of Tanzanian socialism: “But I said this to them, and I will say it again; I am much more an African nationalist than a socialist. The priority for Africa is not socialism; the priority for Africa is development and unity. I would rather have a united capitalist Africa than a bunch of non-viable little things under socialism. Over that I was absolutely clear”, he clarifies.

Mwalimu admits that he may have been resented because he had been vocal about his vision: “Some times when you are more vocal you anger more people. So I annoyed more people than those who were not active….and therefore I was more disappointed”.

Throughout his political life, the organization of the Party was at the top of Mwalimu’s personal agenda, beginning with the drafting of the original TANU Constitution (based on CCP in Ghana, extracted from George Padmore’s Ghana Revolution), his resignation as Prime Minister soon after independence to re-organize the TANU, and finally the formation of the Chama cha Mapinduzi (CCM) to accommodate the politics of the Union with the island of Zanzibar, for which he remained Chairman for a couple of years after retiring as President.

Was Mwalimu ever against the multi-party system? He replies in the negative: “No! No! I was politically brought up by the British and I never saw anything wrong with the parliamentary system”.

The historical fact is that, the earlier post-independence elections were multi-Party. It is also true that, Mwalimu’s democratic sensibility was unhappy with the success of TANU as a result of which opposition parties were annihilated to such an extent that up to 80 per cent of TANU candidates were being returned un-opposed.

Although he was ideologically a one-party man, Mwalimu was not ideologically opposed to multi-party system. It was Mwalimu who lifted the lid off the debate on multi-partism in Tanzania: ”Ideologically I’m a socialist. Ideologically I’m a one-party man. But I have introduced the debate on multipartyism because the idea that it is taboo to question our constitution is undemocratic…. I mean I cannot accept this”, Mwalimu pointed out.

Be the first to comment

Powerful Hands

noreply@blogger.com (Lumadede Adolwa) — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 22:34:00 +0000

African, Arab partnership must overcome history of slavery

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 23:11:00 +0000

When Libyan leader Mouammar Kadhafi recently apologised on behalf of Arab countries that were involved in the African slave trade, some observers regarded his remarks as whimsical, especially because few are wil ling to broach new ideas about the denigration of human dignity engendered by the subjection of Africans to the evils of slave trade.

Many in Africa learnt about slavery as part of history lessons at school, while many have also seen or travelled along the trail of sites, towns, road markers and seaports retracing the Arab Slave Trade in Tanzania and in the rest of East Africa. Beyon d that, not much has happened.

According to available studies, more than five million Africans were captured, enslaved, and shipped to the Middle East, India, Asia, and also to the West.

Today's African population abhors slavery as much as their ancestors did and, as it appears, many will want more than an apology. Analysts have however commended the Libyan leader for his courage in not only talking openly about the issue but als o apologising on behalf of the Arab countries that were involved in slave trade.

'Though coming belatedly, brother Kadhafi's apology is commendable,' said Edis on Maige, a retired Tanzanian teacher. 'No Arab leader had shown such courage and openness to admit the atrocities that their forefathers committed against the African race.

'Despite the passage of time, hidden grudges are still there in our societies a gainst foreigners who perpetuated slave labour. Accounts of people who had suffered under Arab slavery have been handed down from generation to generation. This explains why l ocal people of Arab descent are sometimes detested, especially when they seek influential positions,' Maige said.

As an outcome of entrenched slavery, Arabs became major planters of coconuts, cloves and other spices in Zanzibar and along East African coastal areas in the 1800s. The crops have since then been the economic mainstay of the islands, though their producti on no longer booms as they used to be until the 1970s.

Official abolition of slavery in the isles in 1897 did not make a big difference for the majority of the population. The abolition decree by the colonial rulers and the measures taken to implement it, as it turned out, were designed to bolster Arab slave owners, to tie ex-slaves to the plantations through contracts and to discourage the independence of workers.

For several years, it became apparent that the number of slaves who were being freed remained modest and that ex-slaves were restricted from accessing free labour market.

According to records, the end of the slave trade in coastal East Africa, including Zanzibar, came through the gradual destruction of the complex networks that gathered and distributed slaves.

Zanzibar's clove plantations had survived to enrich Arabs because of slave labour, while slavery itself became an integrated social system under which Africans were controlled as personal property.

The changing political landscape of East Africa greatly contributed to the freedom of slaves and reduced their economic dependence on Arab landowners. The expansion of British imperial activity increased the demand for caravan porters and Zanzibar became a centre of recruitment.

With Mombasa port in Kenya becoming a staging area for caravans to Uganda and construction of the railway linking the two countries, new demand for workers were created.

Therefore, slave owners in Zanzibar witnessed a great exodus as slaves escaped to freedom and new economic opportunities in railway camps.

Although the work in those camps was menial and often dangerous, a slave who deserted his master in the late 1890s could survive in dignity. Wages on the railroad were above the going rate for hired labour on the coast, where economic options for ex-slaves were narrower.

They had no difficulty with the concept of wage labour, but they wanted to control the condition under which they worked, to make cash earnings part of their economic lives rather than to subordinate themselves to plantation labour. The fertile soils of Zanzibar made it possible for a small plot to produce enough crops for a family's subsistence and a surplus for sale.

With a cash income, they could buy all provisions for which they had in the past relied on their owner.

Arab landowners eventually failed to keep ex-slaves as personal dependents tied to their estates and, as the wind of freedom swept across sub-Saharan Africa, the role of the Arab sultanate and the colonial state in Zanzibar came into question.

By 12 January 1964, the Arab predominance and their ruling structure were toppled by a revolution that gave birth to the present Zanzibar, where all citizens enjoy the social and economic benefits of the state.

Despite the history of slavery involving Arabs, however, the relationship between Africa and the Arab world is not so much represented by the fate of slavery victims.

According to Maige, it is heartening to see African and Arab leaders coming together to put a new life in the relationship of their worlds.

'The basis of our relationship had to change fundamentally. We no longer accept subordination in whatever joint ventures the two sides may agree to undertake,' he said.

But Maige warned that African politicians should not use slave trade as an excuse for Africa's underdevelopment.

'Slave trade did not mean the demise of the African race. Renewed partnership with the Arab nations should not be a source of disputes with Africa, but it should enable populations on both sides to advance to better standards of living because we all need each other,' he added.

By Anaclet Rwegayura - Pana 25/10/2010 Afrique en ligne

This is Larger than Ruto or his Clout.

noreply@blogger.com (Lumadede Adolwa) — Sun, 17 Oct 2010 19:41:00 +0000

The recent ruling by the High Court in Kenya is the first test for the country and principals under the new constitution. The law of the land is very clear - Anti-Corruption and Economic Crimes Act, which disqualifies people facing criminal charges from holding office. If Kenya and Kenyans are the realize the change they hope for then it is imperative that law be followed to the letter in this instance.

Any attempts to water down, re-define or skirt around this issue will point the way forward in the implementation of the Constitution and will be another triumph of impunity in Kenya. So I call first on Ruto to be a law abiding statesman and resign pending the proceeding and conviction or acquittal. But knowing Kenyan politicians I believe that my call to action must be to the principals in the coalition. But finally civil society and the general public must appeal, protest and sue, to ensure adherence to the law.

By this measure Ruto must go.

Making Of A Constitution: Kenya

noreply@blogger.com (Lumadede Adolwa) — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 00:22:00 +0000

This is the best account of Kenyan history I have seen. The series covers some of the historic factors underlying Kenya's Constitution:

Part 1

Part II

Part III

Part IV

Part V

Part VI

Powerful East African tribes rocking the boat

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:05:00 +0000

Napoleon Bonaparte of France once told his son while in exile: “My son always study history, reflect on it; it is the true philosophy.” East Africa is among the regions in the world that have a very rich and exciting history.

It is common knowledge to those who have had the time, interest and ability to read that Tanzania’s senior statesman, Baba wa taifa, Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere was willing to postpone and delay the independence of Tanganyika in order to achieve the East African Federation.

Indeed in 1961 when Uganda and Kenya were still fighting for their own independence, Dr. Milton Obote of Uganda and Mzee Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya seemed to support the idea. But when they got their respective independence, Mzee Jomo Kenyatta backtracked.

In his own words he said that his support for the East African Federation before his country’s independence was “ujanja ujanja,” which is Kiswahili for trickery. As President, he made sure that the Kikuyu tribe stood above all the other forty-two tribes of Kenya. He empowered his tribe politically and economically such that no one could govern Kenya without their consent.

It is this superiority complex amongst the Kikuyu that has time and again threatened the national unity and the democratic progress of Kenya and by extension, East Africa. In Uganda, Buganda has always put every regime, and more so the NRM government, on “bunkenke” as President Yoweri Museveni has always stressed. Bunkenke is Luganda word for keeping one on tenterhooks.

There is hardly a regime in Uganda that has not been ‘disorganised’ by Buganda and her demands for a special status of being a state within a state. The Ganda people have also successfully fought Kiswahili, which is actually favoured by majority Ugandans, as the country’s national language.

Buganda, like Zanzibar in Tanzania, has always harboured the need to secede and form an independent country or state of her own. Unlike Zanzibar though which is geographically detached from mainland Tanzania, Buganda is in the heartland of Uganda which makes it very difficult to achieve this desired aspiration.

No Ugandan leader, even if he/she was to be a Muganda him/herself, in their right senses would ever grant Buganda her unrealistic demands of secession. To make it more complicated, Kampala, the capital city of Uganda, is located in Buganda.

Buganda as an entity has never been in bed with the East African Federation. Kabaka Edward Mutesa II, the first President of Uganda, is known to have vehemently opposed the formation of this federation in the 1950s. Now to imagine that Kabaka Muwenda Mutebi, the son of Kabaka Mutesa and current king of Buganda, can support and have the goodwill for the federation is to expect eggs out of a cow.

As our leaders dream big about forming the East African Federation for whatever reasons, they still have a lot of domestic challenges to sort out. This is why when a consultation was carried out in Tanzania for people’s opinion on the East African Federation around 2007, many said: Muungano kwanza; shirikisho baadaye, meaning the union should be streamlined first, and then the federation can come later.

In 1964 after the Afro-Shiraz Party (ASP) successfully took over power, Mwalimu Julius Nyerere of Tanganyika and Sheikh Abeid Amani Karume of Zanzibar merged the two nations with ease to form the United Republic of Tanzania.

This union sailed smoothly, basing on the goodwill legacy of the two leaders until Benjamin Mkapa’s administration, when the passion for the marriage started wearing thin and cracks in the union began to appear more than ever before.

One of the current President Jakaya Kikwete‘s campaign promises was to sort out the cracks in the union government after assuming power. But sources close to him intimate that at times his efforts to heal the cracks have instead created new cracks.

Finally, the efforts our East African leaders have tried to use in trying to manage Buganda, Kikuyu and the Zanzibari reminds one of a statement in A. Koestler’s novel Darkness at noon in which somebody says, “We diagnosed the disease with microscopic exactness; but when we applied a healing knife, a new sore developed elsewhere.”

The author is a teacher and freelance journalist
mwalimakol@gmail.com

Optimist or pessimist, Kenya’s future is clear

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 02:04:00 +0000

For the optimist, Kenya will become the rail, air and sea travels hub of East Africa. Oil and farming products will be hauled on rail and road to the Indian Ocean from places as far away as Uganda, Sudan and Ethiopia.
The nation’s stability and democracy will provide the credibility for an economic rebirth.
For the pessimist, however, corruption and political instability will overtake the country and drag it down into the depths of its neighbours.
Tribal and political battles will divide the country and it will lose its foothold as one of Africa’s greatest democracies.
For the realist, the future is filled with questions. Will there be forthcoming trials of people implicated in the 2007 post-election violence?
Will the nation be able to reverse a culture of corruption to take advantage of some very real economic possibilities?
Will the country rid itself of the current political mess and find new leadership that will take it forward?
Let’s start by looking at the opportunities. With Southern Sudan soon to become independent, Kenya is likely to have a burgeoning economy on its northern border.
They will need to find a way to get their goods to the sea, and Kenya offers the most secure port. As reported, the Chinese are interested in building rail lines that will carry goods from the east, particularly Uganda, to ships ready to sail to Shanghai.
The Ethiopians, seeking to avoid a turbulent Somalia, have the same need.
The negatives are obviously in the papers everyday. Most appalling, at least to me, was the recent rip-off of education money from the Kenyan children by those who were in charge of educating them.
Call me old-fashioned, but the children should be a sacred trust.
Then there is the inflow of weapons from the war zones of an unstable northern Uganda and the Islamic battlegrounds of Somalia. Too many disputes are settled by the barrel of a gun in Kenya.
There is tribalism. In some respects, a tie to one’s past is a good thing. In America, we’re celebrating St Patrick’s Day in a few weeks, and it is said that almost every American has some Irish blood in the veins.
But we all take pride in our heritage, whether it’s English, French or Kenyan.
Tribalism takes the matter to a far different level. The British used tribalism to divide and conquer the continent, and now it’s become the weapon of choice of native Africans, most recently in post-election violence.
And there’s the matter of leadership. Both President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga showed the nation in the last few weeks that their interests were more directed at themselves than at the nation.
Their refusal to sit down and talk put the nation on edge, and almost lit the fires that took so long to extinguish in 2007.
Most observers agree that Kenya desperately needs fresh leadership.
My prediction is that the forces of economic opportunity, combined with the international pressures against corruption, will end up pushing the country towards a more prosperous future.
But Kenyans must mirror the change that they want to see.

By RANDALL SMITH Posted Friday, March 5 2010 at 17:10

DISTURBING TELEVISION – DIVERSION - MILK GLUT AND COTTAGE INDUSTRY

noreply@blogger.com (James Adolwa) — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 17:28:00 +0000

I was sitting before a panel of interviewers today for admission into a training course and one of the questions that was shot at me by the panel was, "What have you watched on television recently that has disturbed you?” Of course with the pressure of an interview my response was absolute rubbish. I went on to talk on how the format of a documentary on television could have been improved...how they should have personalized the presentation by using an interview...how they should have tried to engage the audience by focusing more on the people rather than plain impersonal video shots. Clearly I missed the point of the question and I have already taken myself through the process of feeling like an absolute idiot. So here are the answers I should have given with emphasis on one point that so completely irked me.

Here are a few stories recently carried on Kenyan television that have disturbed me:

• How our politicians divert attention from one scandal that is receiving media attention to resurrect another "dying" but yet to be resolved scandal. Case in point- the maize scandal brought up by one faction of the political class to divert attention from the free primary education scandal in which politicians their side of the coalition are implicated.

• How the prime-minister played down the findings by Price-Waterhouse-Coopers on the maize scandal by saying that the Anti-Corruption Commission had earlier carried out investigations and had found “no wrong doing” by those implicated and exonerated them. However on a positive note he has set-up a committee to reconcile the two contradictory positions.

• The most disturbing of all, is how we, after suffering a long devastating drought and yet to recover from its effects are now forced to pour out thousands of litres of milk because our milk factories are not able to process it. We are still suffering from severe food shortages in many parts of the country, yet we are not at this point able to handle our domestic dairy production. We should have had the capacity to process all this wasted protein.

Our dependence and insistence on large scale industry scares me. It seems that everything (even the simplest) needs to be done on a large scale. It’s about time that we were able as communities to handle our local production. What we produce should be sustainably produced and consumable. If it is not consumable at that point it should be preservable. Local dairy farmers should have capacity (at least in terms of knowledge) to produce cheese or butter or yoghurt or ghee. It was sad to see farmers who had put in so much effort after the drought watch their labour go down the drain. What if this farmer had a way to process this milk? What if the technology and the know-how to process this milk was accessible to him?

With these questions the old concept of cottage industries came to mind. In our rush to industrialize we have ignored this important stage in the process. If we are not making progress on the macro level, let us work on the micro level. Several countries have successfully ensured food security by focusing on small scale local production. On a policy level, our politicians have let us down. It’s time for us to shift focus to small scale manufacturing and production (and I am not talking about jua-kali) its time for industries run by two or tree or ten people scattered in every corner of this country to make a difference in this economy...lets stop thinking super or mega or giga and start working on the local...one person with a cow, another with a micro-dairy, one with a maize shamba, another with a posho mill, one with a soap making project another with a fish farm...small sustainable communities working together…using what they produce and selling, saving, storing or preserving the excess.

However, you still cannot ignore the Macro-level. The government with the input of communities should implement a shift in policy and focus on building local capacity for communities to handle their own production. It is in the governments very own interest to ensure that its communities are knowledgeable enough and capable enough to handle their own economy -whatever the scale- right from production through processing, distribution and consumption. For a country that is yet to achieve food security and experiences such erratic weather patterns we cannot afford to waste such a rich source of protein as milk. Our government needs to be able to predict outcomes and support the efforts of its citizens.

James Adolwa
February 12, 2010

Sustainable fishing is the way forward

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 21:10:00 +0000

The population of Lake Victoria’s most famous produce – the Nile perch – is dwindling and conservationists have started making shocking projections for future stocks.

They say the population of the Nile perch has declined from 1.2 million tonnes at the turn of the century to a mere 331,000 tonnes last year. The figures could plunge further if remedial action is not taken immediately.

Up to 22 million people from the region depend on the lake for fish. The industry directly supports two million people, providing them with much needed incomes to sustain their households.

That the population of the Nile perch is thinning is therefore bad news to many. But it must also be understood that the fishermen face difficult but important choices between conserving the resource – so there will be fish to catch in the future – and earning a decent living.

That is why the duty of conservation must not be left to them. It is encouraging the governments of Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania through the East African Community’s Council of Ministers, have now launched Sh129.6m campaign to help conservation efforts.

Partner states

The ‘Operation Save the Nile Perch’ drive must not be in vain. It must not follow the familiar script of poor locals whose need for economic development is fought by affluent outside conservationists.

Residents of the three partner states rely on the fishing industry for subsistence. And their economic future will be improved more by preserving the ecosystem and promoting better fishing methods than by unsustainably exhausting what is currently available for export.

Conservation efforts must be supported by all stakeholders with partner states being encouraged to implement the proposed ‘harmonised action plan’ to help end illegal fishing on Lake Victoria and help restore the ecological balance.

Now it is up to the Council of Ministers to create regulations that will make the fishing industry successful. It is time to get rid of systems that have failed and replace them with better alternatives that will protect the marine ecosystem, allow fish stocks to rebuild, and increase revenues.

This will allow fishermen to make profit and also ensure future generations will enjoy the delicacy. It is upon the Ministry of Fisheries to ensure fish catchment sites are not only protected but also nurtured and sustainably exploited.

EA Standard

Why Africa welcomes the Chinese

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 21:44:00 +0000

Africa must attract broad investment, not rely on handouts, if we are to sustain development

There is a debate among geopolitical and economic commentators about the merits of Chinese versus western involvement with Africa. One argument is that Chinese investment is exploitative and undermines the development of democracy and human rights on the continent. Others view the matter in terms of competition, arguing that China is encroaching on the decades-long monopoly of the west over Africa's natural resources.

Neither of these viewpoints addresses the core issues. First, major players in global investment and development are discussing Africa without engaging its people as equal partners. Second, Africans are not seen to be proactive in setting their own priorities and terms of engagement.

Development aid, fashioned on this skewed relationship, has long been a key source of income for the continent. While helpful, aid has not delivered sustainable development. It is clear that trade and investment bring greater opportunity for wealth creation. Africa welcomes investment, from the east and west, north and south, and Rwanda is no exception. We want investment that offers skills and jobs, encourages entrepreneurship, and provides the opportunity to improve millions of lives.

This call for investment and trade rather than traditional aid does not mean the latter's contribution to addressing poverty is not recognised. However, the fundamental problem with the current development aid practice is the danger countries face as they become perpetually reliant on handouts.

So what should those who give aid, and those who receive it, focus on? The primary purpose of aid should ultimately be to work itself out, leaving a positive legacy behind. Aid should also be used to create opportunities for trade, enhance self-sufficiency and assist with the development of a robust private sector to attract investment. In many countries, for example, aid offers resources such as fertilisers for free. The intention is good but this often prevents local businesses from being able to provide these goods competitively. Given the choice, people would prefer to work and provide for themselves, rather than receive charity. Africans want self-determination and dignity.

Our continent, like others, requires investment to further its development. Efforts to pursue this need not be seen as a threat to the strengthening of democracy. Of course, African leaders should take good governance and human rights seriously – and most do. This is not – and should not be – because anybody else tells us to, or in return for investment, but because it is the right thing to do. The presence of Chinese investment in Africa does not discharge governments of their responsibilities any more than its presence in the EU or US should erode human rights there.

In Rwanda, we have worked hard to tackle the root causes of corruption and ensure there is a strong case for attracting investment. This programme of reform is yielding results and has been recognised by the World Bank's 2010 Doing Business Index, which saw Rwanda jump from 143rd to 67th position in one year, making it the world's leading reformer. In 2008, Rwanda's GDP grew at 11.2%, and despite the global financial crisis our 2009 projections give us cause for optimism. Wages in key export sectors have grown more than 20% annually over the last eight years, and all these developments have occurred while the percentage of our national budget funded by aid has been reduced by half since 2001.

Ultimately, Africa's relationship with its international counterparts should be redefined. For too long, we have not been able to trade fairly with Europe and the US; trade barriers and subsidies, particularly in agriculture, have protected external markets from African products, hindering our ability to trade as equals. Investment and trade with willing countries, including intra-African trade, helps the continent to build a much-needed culture of entrepreneurship and development.

All would benefit if the world focused on increasing investment in Africa, and if Rwanda and the rest of the continent worked to establish more equitable international partnerships. A trade relationship built on this new approach would be more helpful in reaching what should be our common goal: sustainable development, mutual prosperity and respect.

Paul Kageme
President of Rwanda

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:39:00 +0000

Ni Leboo Joo

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 00:34:00 +0000

The worst insult in some far-right circles in America nowadays is to be called “a Kenyan.”

The label acquired racist overtones when Barack Obama, whose father was Kenyan, won the US presidency, sparking emotional denunciations among the so-called birthers, who say Obama should not have competed for the presidency in the first place because he was allegedly not born in the US, and was in fact a Kenyan.

Last week, when Senator Olympia Snowe broke with fellow Republicans and voted with Obama in favour of health care reform, she came in for such a barrage of criticism from the right that a satirical blog, the Borowitz Report, carried a mock news story to the effect that she had been labelled “a Kenyan” by her party.

“This vote is going to raise suspicions, once again, that Sen Snowe was born in Kenya,” the blog purported to quote Republican Party chairman Michael Steele, adding; “We demand that she prove that she is definitely not Kenyan.”

The blog also purported to quote Orly Taitz, leader of the “birther” movement, as terming Snowe’s vote “textbook Kenyan” behaviour, because, “She’s putting her tribe first.”

What they don’t tell you about Rwanda

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 23:47:00 +0000

Rwanda enjoys a positive reputation internationally and its President Paul Kagame is regularly praised by the World Bank, the US, and UK administrations for his integrity, efforts at reconciliation, and economic policies. I was impressed by his advice to Kenyans at the national prayer breakfast last May to follow his government’s example of commitment to ethnic diversity, consensus building on the common good, national values, and inclusion of all political views in national life and development agenda.

When I visited Rwanda at the request of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative to do a report on the state of human rights and democracy in Rwanda (in connection with Rwanda’s application to join the Commonwealth) my first impressions, despite some critical reports I had read, were favourable: Very efficient and courteous processing of incoming passengers, a safe, clean and well organised Kigali, and bright and suave officials.

However, I was put on guard when every non-official person I interviewed, diplomats, journalists, professionals, and local and international civil society officers, would not speak to me except on assurances of anonymity.

When I read the constitution, I found no mention of ethnic or religious groups, and came across legislation, which banned discussion of ethnicity (yet huge government posters reminded people of the "genocide against the Tutsi", although of course many Hutus had also been massacred). Those who imply that Kagame’s Rwanda Patriotic Front had killed Hutus unnecessarily are heavily penalised, as are those who question official accounts of the genocide. This hardly fits with Kagame’s advocacy of reconciliation, inclusion or coming to terms with the past.

Exiled hutus

Rwanda President Paul Kagame
Reading numerous reports of the UN Security Council, UNHCR or international NGOs, memoirs of some key Rwandan politicians and of the commander of the UN forces Romeo Dallaire, and scholarly literature, I learnt that, though of course the Tutsi had suffered greatly at the hands of a large number of Hutus, the RPF had also killed thousands of Hutus, and driven many to exile (and then pursued them in their countries of exile). Incoming Tutsi have appropriated Hutu owned land. When considered strategic, the RPF allowed the killing of Tutsis. Dallaire writes that their deaths can also be laid "at the door of the military genius, Kagame, who did not speed up his campaign when the scale of genocide became clear and even talked candidly with me at several points about the price his fellow Tutsi might have to pay for the cause". Kagame refused Dallaire’s proposal to accept ceasefire to stop the massacre, because it did not suit Kagame’s grand design of Tutsi hegemony. He has been quoted as criticising people who see the war in terms of human rights. He has said that some conflicts are good, "a sort of purification" which "erupt in order to make a real transformation possible".

The Rwanda regime relies on power structures that sometimes run parallel to, and sometimes crosscut, the formal government; and in which the army plays a central role. The country has relied heavily for its revenue (to fund its institutions and elite) on plunder of the mineral resources of the DRC.

Mode of extraction

It bears the primary responsibility for the political and economic instability in the Great Lakes Region (including the overthrow of the Congolese government), which is functional to its mode of extraction of wealth and its regional dominance.

It practises, and has contributed to, a complex, regional regime of illegal economic transactions, evasion of UN sanctions, arming of militias, criminal business organisations, and disregard of neighbours’ borders and fiscal systems, which has greatly impoverished the region.

The RPF has used an extraordinary amount of violence, domestically and internationally. It has killed several thousands Hutus, citizens and others, and is responsible for the deaths of even more through displacement, malnutrition and hunger. It has denied hundreds of thousands of children the opportunity of education, and deprived millions of family and community life. It has conscripted child soldiers. The UN has voluminously documented these practices and repeatedly chastised Rwanda for its irresponsible behaviour in the DRC. Beneath the gentility of RPF leaders, the tidiness of Kigali, and its gleaming high rise buildings, I found a country deeply fragmented, operating under the hegemony of a small Tutsi political elite, which rules through oppression and fear.

Effective Public Relations

I discovered that these leaders are extraordinarily effective at public relations, especially as directed at the West, and make the most of the guilt in the West for doing so little to prevent the terrible genocide in 1994, directed largely but not exclusively at the Tutsi.

[The report of the CHRI can be found at http://www.humanrightsinitiative.org/publications/hradvocacy/rwanda’s_application_for_membership_of_the_commonwealth.pdf]

By Prof Yash Ghai
Prof Ghai is a former CKRC Chaiman

Is Kenya a failed state?

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:22:00 +0000

A Professor who taught Research Methods and Methodology once told our class that "what you see depends on two things: Where you are standing and what direction you are facing."

I suspect this statement may well inform the response to the public debate as to whether Kenya is a failed state or not.

From casual observation, one cannot fail to see that the political elite in Kenya froth at the mouth whenever anyone dares compare Kenya with her troubled neighbours such as Somalia or DRC. Such politicians use words like "we are a sovereign state" and "we have a duly elected government" to justify that we are not a failed state.

Rarely do the voices of the masses get the same publicity as those of the powerful elite on this debate or any other. It would be safe to say that politicians and wananchi would have converse opinions on the "failed state" debate because the two, metaphorically speaking, stand on different podiums and face different directions and therefore see and experience different "Kenya’s".

The term "failed state" is often used by political commentators and journalists to describe a state perceived as having failed at some of the basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government.

The Fund for Peace, United States-based think tank, uses the following attributes to characterie a failed state:

loss of physical control of its territory, or of the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force therein,

erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions,

an inability to provide reasonable public services, and

an inability to interact with other states as a full member of the international community.

On the other hand, the UK-based Crisis States Research Centre defines a failed state as a condition of "state collapse" that it can no longer perform its basic security and development functions and loses effective control over its territory and borders.

Since 2005, the Fund for Peace and the magazine Foreign Policy, publishes an annual index called the Failed States Index. The list only assesses sovereign states (determined by membership in the United Nations).

It has released this year’s Failed States Index. From a list of 177 failed states, Kenya is ranked 14th among the top 20. So if our politicians bothered to be informed they would realize that sovereignty does not exclude one from being a failed state as all 177 states named as failed states are all sovereign, some, like Somalia, with very impressive economic growth!

The index's ranks are based on twelve indicators of state vulnerability - four social, two economic and six political.

Social indicators include: Demographic pressures; Massive movement of refugees and internally displaced peoples; Legacy of vengeance-seeking group grievance; Chronic and sustained human flight.

Economic indicators include: Uneven economic development along group lines; Sharp and/or severe economic decline.

Political indicators include: Criminalisation and/or delegitimisation of the state; Progressive deterioration of public services; Widespread violation of human rights; Security apparatus as ‘state within a state’; Rise of factionalised elites; Intervention of other states or external factors.

Published on 19/07/2009

By Roseleen Nzioka

Childish things, childish ways

noreply@blogger.com (Lumadede Adolwa) — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 21:47:00 +0000

A wise man of the ancient once said " when I was a child, I did childish things. Now that I am a man, I have put away the childish and act like a man". I was in Kenya about a month ago, and during my visit two interesting events occurred. These were the live telecast of parliamentary proceedings and the verdict on the Tom Cholmondeley Delamere case.

These were both significant events in the history of the country, one heralding a new era of openness and maturity for the Kenyan society. While the other displaying our inability to deal with an old era, and its resulting diversity. We focused our attention on the narrow prism with which every Kenyan seems to define self, by - race, tribe, ethnicity, in evaluating guilt. However, inspite of these two momentous occurrence, I was intrigued by a different phenomenon, one more apparent and obvious. I watched the central figures of authority in these branches of government. And conspicuous on each head, the Speaker, Kenneth Marende and High Court Judge, Muga Apondi, both wore these hideous blonde wigs in what appeared to be either oblivion or pride.

When I was a child, I copied and aped a lot. I pretended to be my father, a policeman, a soldier and we made costumes that allowed us to look the part. I believe we called it 'kalongo'. This throw back to my childhood was an epiphany into the state of Kenya's maturity. We have a population looking at figures in authority with real expectations of life and death, however the leaders are playing the part aping some distant colonial era, some servant of the Royal British Empire. This lack of self awareness or knowledge of self was excusable in the 1960s, but 40 years later we are still playing 'kalongo' and acting the part.

Games have no accountability and the outcomes are not real. We have had vision 1995, 2000, 2010 and now 2030. These are words on paper, a script for a well choreographed play, where all the actors go back to their real lives after the curtain falls with a fat paycheck, nothing real.

Some will site tradition, and I am the biggest fan of tradition, however we must pause and ask ourselves whose tradition. We as Kenyans run the risk of playing the baffon, the joker, the jester at every court. Parallel to a colonial tradition we have a liberation tradition and too often we have honored the colonial over the liberation tradition in Kenya and to some extent Africa. Lake Victoria, Victoria Falls are just symbols of this immaturity, an inability to take full ownership of yourself.

We need to rediscover who we are and rekindle what our true values were and here is my short list of where we should start.

A new constitution that reflects the will and tone of the people to replace current one handed down by the British
Full ownership of our successes and failures - its the only way we will learn to do better
New land policy that honors indigenous land rights - otherwise what were the struggles for?
Renaming of all national symbols and land features
And finally getting rid of those UGLY WIGS

If you look at countries that have shared a liberation tradition - United States, India, South Africa - have all shed this semblance of a clingy undesirable past. Some how we seem to find it a convenient scapegoat. We blame every issue on the colonial era, we kill each other, steal land, even urinate in the streets and blame the colonial era. We need to stop the games, no more 'kalongo' this is realings we are way past 'tryzex' and 'mujaribu'. Or have we already lost our marbles?

Accord, Constitution have no answer

noreply@blogger.com (Lumadede Adolwa) — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:33:00 +0000

Kenneth Marende

Honourable members, on Thursday, April 23, just as the House was about to resume the interrupted debate on the Motion for the approval by the House of the names of Members nominated to serve on the House Business Committee, the Member for Kisumu Town West, the Honourable John Olago-Aluoch, stood on a point of order claiming to raise an issue touching on the ability of this House to defend the Constitution. The Member noted that the Motion for approval of Members of the House Business Committee had been brought by the Honourable Vice-President as Leader of Government Business. He, however, sought to know from the Chair who under our Constitution is supposed to move the Motion.

Citing the definition of the ‘Leader of Government Business’ in the Standing Orders, which at Standing Order 2 is defined as "the Minister designated by the Government as the Leader of Government Business in the House" the Member posed the question: "Who is the Government in the context of the Kenyan situation?"

Olago-Aluoch went on to argue that ‘Government’ in the context of the Kenyan situation is defined by the Constitution and the National Accord and Reconciliation Act and that, considering the functions of the Prime Minister as set out in the Constitution, the inference from the Constitution and the National Accord is that the Leader of Government Business and the chairperson of the House Business Committee is a constitutional affair. It was the argument of the Olago-Aluoch that the Leader of Government Business ought to be the Prime Minister and that it would be unconstitutional for any other person to be the Leader of Government Business or the chairperson of the House Business Committee. He, thus, sought a Ruling from the Chair on these matters before the House could proceed.

Weighty Matter

The Chair took the view that the matters raised by Olago-Aluoch were weighty and decided to hear a few more contributions from Members before indicating the way to proceed.

Honourable Members, what followed was a barrage of learned and educated opinions by many Members canvassing various positions on the issues raised. In the process a number of Members also raised new issues which merit consideration and comment by the Chair. Some of the Members who gave opinion or raised issues include Honourables Mutula Kilonzo, James Orengo, Gitobu Imanyara, Kiraitu Murungi, Dr (Wilfred) Machage, Isaac Ruto, Uhuru Kenyatta, Charles Kilonzo, William Ruto, Walter Nyambati, William ole Ntimama, Abdul Bahari, Prof George Saitoti, Chris Okemo, Peter Munya, Elizabeth Ongoro, Dr Naomi Shaban, John Mbadi, Prof Sam Ongeri, Ababu Namwamba, Prof Anyang’ Nyong’o, Bifwoli Wakoli, Farah Maalim and George Thuo. This list is not exhaustive.

Honourable Members, you will recall that at the end of all the contributions, I delivered a communicationin which I among other things promised, without prejudice to the Ruling I undertook to deliver today, to seek direct audience with His Excellency the President and the Right Honourable Prime Minister with a view to bringing the matter of the constitution of the House Business Committee, its chairperson and the Leader of Government Business to a speedy and amicable conclusion. I also undertook to make known to this House, the results of that initiative. Indeed, I will do so in the course of this communication.

Speaker ill-equipped

Honourable Members, before I get to the heart of this Ruling, let me remind you of what I said on Thursday, 23rd April, 2009. I said then and I repeat now that the office of the Speaker of the National Assembly is singularly ill-equipped to advise on or determine for the for the Executive arm of Government, and, for that matter, political parties, how they shall run their affairs.

I further stated that the Speaker will limit himself to questions of constitutionality, statute and the Standing Orders, but only so far as these relate to the business and affairs of this House. I, therefore, want to make it clear from the onset that subject to these qualifications, I do not intend to traverse territory that is outside the province of my office.

Honourable Members, I have distilled the following issues from the points of order and contributions made:

a) What is the definition of the Government in the context of Standing Order No 2?;

b) Whether the Speaker having recognised or allowed the Vice-President to appear before the House as the Leader of Government Business, is estopped from entertaining any questions as to the legality or propriety of his incumbency as such;

c) Whether the House has any role in the nomination or determination of the Leader of Government Business;

d) Whether the Constitution, as read with the National Accord and Reconciliation Act, provides for who shall be the Leader of Government Business in this House;

e) How any inconsistency between the National Accord and Reconciliation Act and the Constitution, or for that matter the Standing Orders, is to be resolved;

f) What the Speaker is to do in the event that he receives two different letters from the same Government designating different persons as Leader of Government Business in the House;

g) Whether the House can remove a Leader of Government Business and if so by what procedure;

h) The procedure for nomination of the chairperson of the House Business Committee and whether the nominee of Government for chairperson is to be part of the list submitted to the House for approval or is additional to it;

i) Whether the House can proceed to approve the membership of the House Business Committee without regard to the question of who the Leader of Government Business or the chairperson of the Committee is.

Honourable Members, I seek your indulgence as the menu of issues for determination is very long. Allow me to pronounce myself as concisely as I can on each of these issues:

The first and probably the most important issue is the question of who or what constitutes the ‘Government’, for the purposes of the designation of a Minister envisaged under Standing Order 2. This issue was canvassed at length and is at the core of the present impasse.

Various documents were cited as providing the answer; including the Interpretation and General Provisions Act; Chapter 2 of the Laws of Kenya, the Constitution and the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. The simple question being asked is this: When the Standing Orders provide for designation of a Minister to be the Leader of Government Business in the House by the Government, who is envisaged to make that designation?

Honourable Members, the position of Leader of Government Business exists in virtually all Parliaments in the Commonwealth. There are, however, no hard and fast rules as to who shall hold that office. In some jurisdictions, the matter is expressly provided for in the Constitution, while in others it obtains by statute or the standing orders. The following few examples shall illustrate this point:

No Universal Rule

In the Republic of Ghana, the Leader of Government Business is not specifically provided for in the Constitution and the holder of that office need not be a Minister. In fact, today, the Leader of Government Business in the Parliament of Ghana is not a Minister. He is not a member of Cabinet and cannot lay a paper in the House on behalf of a Minister.

In the Republic of Uganda, pursuant to Article 108A of the Constitution, the Prime Minister is designated as the Leader of Government Business in Parliament. In the United Republic of Tanzania, under the Constitution, the Prime Minister is appointed by the President and is the Leader of Government Business in the National Assembly and has authority over the control, supervision and execution of the day-to-day functions and affairs of the Government.

In the Republic of South Africa, the President appoints the Leader of Government Business in Parliament. In democracies with a longer history such as the United Kingdom and India, the Leader of Government Business is designated by the Prime Minister who is the Head of Government. There is, therefore, no universal rule of general application in this matter.

Honourable Members, in Kenya, the office of the Leader of Government Business is recognised and defined only in the Standing Orders. The position as defined in the Standing Orders must be construed, not generally, but only in the context of the National Assembly. The holder is the Leader of the Business of the Government only for the purposes of the House.

National Accord

The phrase ‘Leader of Government Business’ is not, to my knowledge, to be found anywhere in the Constitution or in the National Accord and Reconciliation Act. The position is not established by or under any other statute. It follows that neither the Constitution, nor any statute has provision on the appointment of the Leader of Government Business in the House.

In providing that the Leader of Government Business shall be the Minister designated by the Government, I find that, in terms of how the House functions, the Standing Orders mean no more than that the Leader of Government Business is to be the Minister designated by the Government. It is that organ that is entrusted with the running of the Executive arm of the Republic.

The office of Leader of Government Business in this House has been held by various persons since Independence. At some times the office has been held by the Vice-President while at other times it has been held by a Minister. The one constant thread running through is that the decision about who shall be the Leader of Government Business has always been in the Executive.

Honourable Members, a number of Members suggested that as the Speaker had "recognised" the Vice-President acting as Leader of Government Business at some point, the Speaker was, therefore, estopped from entertaining any queries on the legality or propriety of the Vice-President’s incumbency as such. This is not so. The role of the Speaker, as is well known, is to act as a neutral arbiter. The Speaker is not a protagonist in the arena that is the House. The Speaker does not raise points of order on his own motion...

Continues Thursday.

Hon. Kenneth Marende, E.G.H., M.P.,
Speaker of the National Assembly
28th April, 2009.

When a ruler surrenders instruments of State to hangers on, tragedy is never far

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 19:08:00 +0000

Under different circumstances, leading lawyers like Gibson Kamau Kuria would today ask for legal mechanisms to be put in motion to show that President Kibaki can still continue being relied upon to steer the ship of State.

They would invoke the Constitution to enquire into the wellness and ability of the national CEO. They would seek to know that it is safe to continue trusting him with the heavy, sensitive and critical responsibility of Office of President and Commander-in- Chief of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Kenya.

But Kibaki is not Daniel arap Moi. People like Kamau Kuria and others know why they were very vocal against Moi. They know why they say nothing on Mzee Kibaki’s atrophied presidency. Instead they praise him, even as the country hurtles most dangerously on Destruction Highway.

But history shows that this is how it has always been with societies that will self-destruct. They have a sleepy, slow and laid back incumbent who quietly surrenders the instruments of State to his courtiers and hangers on. As the nation dithers on Destruction Highway, he is conspicuously missing in action. Only occasionally does he peep outside his hideout to mutter some irrelevant things while the nation slowly smoulders in what will presently become a full-blown inferno.

When France was gravitating towards the apocalypse of revolution in the late 1780s, Louis XVI was an absent-minded, slow and laid back Head of State and Government. He squandered valued time in making door locks and experimenting with guns and chasing after wild animals in the jungle. When he was not doing this, he would be sampling fine wines in the Palace at Versailles, while the spoilt Queen Marie Antoinette massaged his feet. Or he would simply be wallowing in perfumed bathtubs, completely oblivious of the storm building outside. Even when the custodians of public opinion raised the red flag, the drowsy King Louis XVI took no notice. In the proper order of time, France paid the price. But Louis XVI also paid his price, with his head, as did the spoilt Queen.

Elsewhere in Russia, King Nicholas II had for all practical purposes and intents surrendered the country into the hands of his spoilt Queen, Tsarina Alexandria and Grigori Yefimovich Rasputin. Rasputin, also known as the Mad Monk, doubled up as the queen’s not-so-secret lover and magic maker. Nicholas would in the proper order of time be forced to abdicate from the throne in May 1917. His reign saw Russia degenerate from one of the greatest powers of the times to an economic and military disaster. Historians have told of how the Bolsheviks ended the Romanov Dynasty with the weakly Nikolai Alexandrovich Romanov as the last emperor. The country paid a heavy price.

Weak leaders are bad for any country. And President Kibaki is clearly not a strong willed leader. The religious fraternity has recently ventilated its exasperation with what it calls ‘a moribund president’. What they are saying is simply that the President is not in charge of the affairs of State. At any rate, he does not behave like one who is in charge. President Kibaki leaves you wondering what the presidency is about.

Ugandans are flying their flag on Kenyan soil and the President thinks this is just a practical joke. They tamper with beacons in West Pokot and the President’s voice is missing. Goons slaughter dozens of Kenyans in Gathiathi village and the President is missing in action. Kenyatta University goes up in flames under the charge of hopelessly flawed leadership and the President is nowhere.

The country is in the throes of a frightening constitutional crisis and the President sees nothing wrong with this. We have no electoral commission and no voters’ registers. If this presidency were to fall vacant in the present circumstances the country would burn. But the President is doing nothing to correct this absurdity, which in the first place he should never have allowed.

Make no mistake. The country is in a free fall. The electoral commission collapsed. The Judiciary is tottering on the brink of collapse. The Cabinet has collapsed. At its very best; it is a Tower of Babel. The presidency is ailing and crumbling. The only institution that can save Kenya is Parliament. But Parliament is ailing and facing imminent paralysis. For all its avarice and allied weaknesses, the Tenth Parliament must not be allowed to collapse. A presidency in atrophy requires other organs of State must take leadership. It is on the shoulders of the Speaker Kenneth Marende that the load of saving Kenya rests.

He must begin by saving Parliament. He must not let Parliament collapse. He must ensure there is a Leader of Government Business in the House next week and that this leader is not some whimsical self-seeking opportunist or turncoat who cannot be trusted with the reforms that Parliament must undertake, beginning now. Parliament for its part needs to move swiftly with the reform programme and to lead the way in Agenda Four of the National Peace and Reconciliation Accord.

Barrack Muluka

Is Africa Staring at Overt International Supervision

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 02:34:00 +0000

Hate or love Paul Collier, the Oxford University gadfly with provocative ideas about development or lack of it, in the poorest countries of the world: but you can trust him to come up with astonishing analysis every time he gets to it. That is precisely what he has done in his latest book War, Guns and Votes: Democracy in Dangerous Places.
Collier is a contrarian. He goes against the flow of conventional thinking, which, in the case of the countries he baptized the bottom billion assumes that somehow those countries will turn around and become success stories. Not so says Collier, who by the way has updated the list of the countries he implies are basket cases to include virtually all sub-Saharan African countries. The way he sees it, the trajectory is in the wrong direction. More precisely, these poor and dangerous places are cornered. Left to their devices, these countries will stew in their misery forever, which may be fine by the rest of the international community except that the conditions of these countries imposes global public bad on the rest of the international community, which must act in self-interest, if nothing else, to minimize the costs to them.
Collier is not a heterodox thinker of big ideas distilled from opaque philosophies. He bases his analysis squarely on results of state of the art quantitative analysis. The thrust of Collier’s argument is that poor countries are hobbled by many challenges, most of them self-inflicted, that it would be unrealistic to expect them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps although an attempt to do so would help.
Take the matter of nation building. According to Collier, few of these places are nations: maybe they are states, and even so barely, but they are not nations in the modern sense of the term. Collier says a nation must have some internal identity and cohesion. Most of them lack both. Why is that a problem? By Collier’s lights, many of the countries are too big to be nations in the sense that they are an amalgam of various competing, often ethnic identities, and too small to be states because their size does not allow much of economies in the provision of public goods. That is his punch line. Bad consequences proceed from this fact. The politics in these places is ethno-centred because national cohesion is nonexistent. Bad governance further exacerbates the problem because its modus operandi is ethnic manipulation that sets the stage for perpetual ethnic rivalries over the control of public goods without consideration to the whole society.
In these circumstances, observes Collier, increased democracy simply ups the scale of rivalry that very often results in violence and the weakening of already weak societies Does Collier therefore believe that democracy is bad for fragile societies? In the short-term yes, but the alternative, dictatorship, is not really an option because it merely suppresses pressures without attempting to address their root causes. The reason increased freedom becomes disruptive is because rulers and the casts of supporting elites have not internalized democratic and accountability values. This leads to fundamental contradiction between form and content.
Collier dwells a great extent on Kenya as an exemplar of what could go wrong. The book is dedicated to John Githongo, the whistleblower on grand corruption in Kenya and the subject of a recently published book on governance in Kenya, It’s Our Turn to Eat, by Michela Wrong It did not surprise Collier in the least that the last election in Kenya held in 2007 was followed by mayhem of frightening proportions. The tragedy according to Collier is that the correct lessons are being missed and episodes like those that are likely to be repeated if both the countries concerned and the international community do not put the effort to learn from such experiences.
As far as internal solutions go, Collier pins his hopes on enlightened and visionary leadership such as Julius Nyerere's and Nelson Mandela's. Collier’s acknowledged friends, Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni and Rwanda’s Paul Kagame do not make the cut although of the latter, Collier says, is the most effective state builder in Africa. Notice the use of the word state rather than nation. Kagame is building an effective but largely authoritarian state that militates against nation building because of its ethno-based ideologies.
Since the emergence of visionary leaders is chancy, Collier focuses on the international community as a potential source of corrective. International aid is the lifeline of the bottom billion countries. The trouble is, says Collier, aid has not been strategically and effectively deployed leading to disillusionment on both sides, particularly among the donors, who keep doling out money anyway for a variety of reasons, guilt among them.
This nonsense should stop declares Collier who would go a step further and add even stricter conditionality to ensure that aid reaches those it is intended for.
Sovereignty should not be an issue Collier claims boldly. Countries of the bottom billion do not have much national sovereignty to begin with; few of them are nations anyway. They might have state sovereignty but even that has been converted to presidential sovereignty. By framing the issue thusly, Collier carefully isolates what he sees as the main obstacle, leadership or lack of it, and then proceeds to propose remedies that target that major link in the chain. His conclusion: the international community should design carrots and sticks to influence leaders in the Bottom Billion countries to move towards better governance systems. The sticks, threats of military intervention in certain instances, should be credible. After all, observes Collier, the international community owes it to fellow human beings who bear the brunt of suffering in the Bottom Billion countries. A return to colonialism or trusteeship of a sort? Collier is unapologetic. If that is what it takes to heave the benighted places in the 21st century, so be it. Already, he says, it is underway in several places. Liberia has virtually ceded its sovereignty of its financial management to international donors. All checks cut by the country’s ministry of finance have to be countersigned by donors.
Collier may have found unlikely allies in certain parts of Africa. During a recent demonstration to protest the suspicious killing of two civil society activities, university students in Kenya carried placards calling for a return of foreign rule in Kenya. That was not much different from a comment by a bewildered character in Chinua Achebe’s the Anthills of the Savannah who wondered perplexedly when independence would end. Beware Africa. Berlin Conference II may not be too far off.

By John Mulaa PhD

Help Us Make A Powerful Noise

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 22:56:00 +0000

Hanh is an HIV-positive widow in Vietnam. Nada, a survivor of the Bosnian war. And Jacqueline works the slums of Bamako, Mali. Three very different lives. Three vastly different worlds. But they share something in common: Power. These women are each overcoming gender barriers to rise up and claim a voice in their societies. Through their empowerment and ability to empower others, Hanh, Nada and Jacqueline are sparking remarkable changes. Fighting AIDS. Rebuilding communities. Educating girls.

Hanh learned that she had contracted HIV after her husband and daughter died from AIDS. Bouncing back from despair, she started a self-help group in Vietnam, called Immortal Flower, to give people living with HIV/AIDS a place for support, counseling and health care.

Nada is a working mother of three children. As a refugee, she survived the Bosnian War. Her women’s association, Maja Kravica, is helping ease hostilities between Serbs and Bosniaks in a region marred by war crimes and massive destruction. Nada is building an agricultural cooperative to offer employment opportunities for war widows, and fair trade markets for families to sell their crops and livestock.

Jacqueline, better known as “Madame Urbain” fights forced labor practices in the slums of Bamako, Mali. Madame Urbain stands up for the rights of powerless girls who are often abused in the workplace or on the streets of the big city. Her organization, APAF, provides girls a basic education, teaches them vocational skills and places them in safe jobs

A Powerful Noise takes you inside the lives of these women to witness their daily challenges and their significant victories over poverty and oppression. Their stories are personal yet illustrate larger issues affecting millions of marginalized women worldwide. A Powerful Noise is a meditation on the inherent potential of women to change the world.

USI NI BORE

noreply@blogger.com (James Adolwa) — Sat, 07 Feb 2009 20:26:00 +0000

This might seem a bit of a diversion from the main themes tackled on this site but somehow things might eventually tie in at the end. I attended a music concert by a group of young Kenyan musicians at the Goethe-Insitut. The concert was to mark the end of the 24 Nairobi exhibition.

The group is “JUST A BAND” the title of the concert “Muziki wa Kenya” this was a strange title because their music is mainly electronic music. Not many Kenyans play let alone listen to electronic music. The concert opened with an interesting rendition of the Kenyan National Anthem with electric guitars and drums and that caught the attention of most of us. I havn’t heard the national anthem played like that before.

.
The music of Just a Band is mentally stimulating, the sort of music that you listen to with headphones so that you can catch all the words and when there are no words you just want to listen to the instrumentation it is good that Kenyans are starting to write music like this, it is good that Kenyan musicians are getting creative enough to be intelligent. When I walked in to the auditorium and saw three computers sitting next to the microphones I knew I was in for something different and when the three bespectacled introverts who obviously cannot dance walked onto the stage and started punching on the computer keyboards and good music came out, I was converted, there is something like “Kenyan electronic music”.

There is one song that sums everything up for me.. The title “Usini Bore” transated “don’t bore me” The song is inspired (as the artist said) by the cost of an onion. He spoke of how the cost of living in Kenya has gone up, how food prices have sky rocketed how policy makers don’t seem to be doing their job and are constantly reacting to crisis and only when it is highlighted in the media. He seems to ask himself (this is my own interpretation) how real is all of this? Sure, you can blame some of it on the global financial crisis but most are just not real not genuine. Is some of this caused by some politicians playing the cards with some middle men who can open and close the taps of supply as they wish (we have seen this with the fuel shortage) is someone playing around with the supply for a quick buck? Then there are the other scandals: maize, Triton and the list goes on.

It seems like something is up… some scheme…someone or some people are always up to something and when they are exposed explanations that are given are a cover up for something else…and it is to those politicians that he is saying “USI NI BORE”

If you would like to know more about the band visit http://kwani.org/main/author/jaband/ you can also view some of their music videos on youtube

In tribute: Notes from James Kariuki Muiruri and the "Ng'ethu Star".

noreply@blogger.com (village headman) — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:42:00 +0000

It is with dire sadness i post this notes. For a young man's life has been lost. An individual who trully embodied the spirit of the rising generation. I will not dwell on the circumstaces of his passing but rather empasis on his ambitious optimisim of the future very well expressed in his notes.

Ladies and Gentlemen In tribute: notes from James Kariuki Muiruri and the "Ng'ethu Star".

My Farewell and Gratitude to Sheffield, London and Kent

Back at home, my bags are now unpacked with I having left the only life I have known for the last six years! And it all ended in Sheffield, a Great City built on seven hills. With all its splendour, its surrounding beauty fondly and constantly reminded me of the stars and breathtaking valleys of Ngethu village where I was bred and raised as a child. Now in Nyari Estate, my heart is as peaceful as a quiet afternoon as I reflect on my recent past while gazing through the window to capture the lights beneath the beautiful pattern of street lights. Having originally left Nairobi for London on the 14th of September 2002, I can safely say that it has been a tremendous academic expedition. Back then, the many men that blessed me as I left the airport on that momentous night must have known what we can achieve with our education. And as the day of my home-coming party draws near, the women await to dance and say the full five Ngemis.

THE IMPOSSIBLE IS NOTHING!! In six years, I attained three law degrees, including the Big one, a PhD in law that was awarded to me on my birthday; 3rd October 2008. Although Sheffield is my second home, I believe that this is how my story in the UK shall be told. It all started at the University of Kent which accorded me a Bachelor of Laws (Hons) degree in July 2004. But it was in September of that year when my life got more exciting after I enrolled at the University of London. Not only did I achieve a Distinction in the LLM-Public International Law, I was also awarded the Drapers Company Prize for Academic Excellence in December 2005. Those that know me well recognise the magnitude of this feat, particularly with I previously having been written off during my high school days where I got and E in math after having entered the prestigious Mangu High School with the lowest marks ever. A decade later, I can engage in a little bit of contentment when I reflect on how a full Scholarship from the University of Sheffield allowed me to teach law for three years and attain a PhD.

MY DEEPEST GRATITUDE goes to those who allowed me to be myself, as I really am, and urged me on. Some stem from my early days on this earth while others have been the angels that I have come across along the way in this journey. Through all my days, my closest friends have shone, particularly during those extremely difficult moments when I found myself alone in the dark with instinct as my only companion. But they also know that I would not have wanted it any other way. I remain, and will always be, an eternal optimist who aspires to live a complete life. As I bid my farewell to my academic and exciting social life in the UK, I wish everyone well. I know that although history remains the ultimate judge, there are always ways that one would always wish to be remembered. So for the moment, I hope to show that amidst all the partying, crazy times and occasional madness, it is still possible to maintain a sense of purpose and return to your faith and ability to achieve your dreams.

LOOKING BACK, there are many memorable times that shall forever be engraved in my heart wherever I go. I will always cherish the victorious moment when I successfully represented a Disabled man at the Benefits Tribunal in Kent in 2004. We beat the system! Also, my graduation in London in a full Maasai outfit (in memory of my great grandmother) remains the most fulfilling moment so far. And I cannot thank my friends enough for making our week in London such a success for my family. As for the Sheffield crew, I am definitely going to miss you; the times we have had are out of this world. Thank you for electing me as the President of the East African Society where we won all the awards there were to win in 2006. With humility I urge you on. And in doing so, I must also now melt in the Nairobi’s heat and take to the skies. Truly, to All, I wish you all the best in the future and I will be there.

orginally posted by James kariuki Muiruri on Facebook :Tuesday, January 20, 2009

A report card for the Grand Coalition

noreply@blogger.com (Paza Sauti Moderator) — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 08:00:00 +0000

This is an end-of-year report card for the grand coalition. I suggest we grade it on two things; effort and achievement. Overall, the government gets a “D-plus” for effort and an “E” for achievement.

I have two reasons for this modest grade. One, this government is built on a lie. What the two principals shared was positions, not power.

In fact, the 50:50 power deal was a fat lie. It did not happen, it will not happen! On this account, Mr Raila Odinga was cheated yet again. The record must reflect that President Kibaki has never won a straight election.

In 2002, he defrauded Mr Odinga through the MoU. In 2007, they had to swear him in at night. And this deceit continues to unfold in the coalition. Although ODM is in ‘power’, all they have is an illusion of power.

The result is political impotence: they want to act, but they cannot! But my second reason is more tragic.

In this coalition, the president has behaved like the proverbial ‘dog in a manger’.

This dog did not eat grass, but it guarded the manger to ensure that the cows did not eat either. Its point? If it cannot have the grass, no one has a right to eat it.

And this is President Kibaki’s approach to power. He is not interested in it, but he will not allow anyone else to have it. The result of this is paralysis in the running of Government.

This is why I give the coalition an “E” on achievement. Similarly, and on this account, I suggest we give the president a “D minus” for effort and a “C plus” for performance. And this is because, instead of giving us ‘cruel rule’ he has given us ‘no rule’.

Let us grade the other members of the ‘matatu’ presidency now. Regarding the Prime Minister Raila Odinga, I submit that he has done his best. And for this, I give him a straight “A” for effort.

However, and because he is powerless, I give him a “C plus” on performance. But I have another reason for this and I want to give it by way of a story.

A French entomologist took a caterpillar and placed it on the rim of a flower pot. Inside the pot, he placed the caterpillar’s favourite food — pine needles.

The caterpillar began to crawl around the rim of the pot, smelling the food and desperately wanting to get closer. According to the scientist, the caterpillar crawled around the rim for seven days and nights without being able to reach the food.

Having failed, but still attempting to, the caterpillar died of starvation. Each time the caterpillar went round the rim, it counted that as an achievement and saw itself getting closer to the food. It could not distinguish activity from achievement.

And this is Mr Odinga’s problem. Like the caterpillar, he is busy at work alright. However, and because he is ‘powerless’, we must not confuse his activities with achievement

As for the vice-president, Mr Kalonzo Musyoka, we do not know what he does. As such, we cannot grade him. But we must also tell him the following: “…the best calculation is the absence of calculation” The fact that he is vague and ungradable is politically strategic.

And the strategy here is simple: they must never see you coming! The Deputy Prime Ministers, Mr Uhuru Kenyatta and Mr Musalia Mudavadi should be graded together.

For effort, I give them an “E minus” and for performance, I give them an “E minus” too. The two have potential, but they lack in guts and creativity. In fact, they are condemned to the ‘curse of permanent potential’.

In this curse, a story is told of a man who was very cautious. He never laughed or played. He never risked or dared. And when he passed away, his insurance was denied.

The argument was that he never really lived, and so how could he have died? This is the story of the two guys.

Regarding the other ministers, I suggest we put them in two lists. The first comprises of the performers, the other is made up of the goofers.

From the first list, Mr John Michuki gets an unqualified “A” for effort and an “A plus” for performance. This mzee is a serious Kenyan and ‘hats –off’ to him! Mr William Ruto and Ms Martha Karua get an “A” for their diligence in ministerial duties.

However, they get a “B minus” for their politics. And I am compelled into this grade by Napoleon Bonaparte. According to this strategist “ …in order to have ultimate victory, one must be ruthless”.

But one must temper their ruthlessness with a streak of charm. That is why Napoleon adds that “…a good king must wear a velvet glove behind his iron fist”. And this is what is lacking in the ruthless politics of Mr Ruto and Ms Karua.

This Christmas, I suggest that they acquire a pair of velvet gloves to cover their bare knuckles. The second list has Mr Makwere who gets a straight “F”.

Similarly, Mr Otieno Kajwang gets an “F” for playfulness. If I was a school teacher, I would recommend the expulsion of Mr Makwere and order Mr Kajwang to bring his mother to school the next term!

And now a Christmas message to our greedy MPs. As you enjoy your untaxed Sh800,000 this Christmas, I want to leave you with the words of Okot p’Bitek in “Song of an African Woman”.

“ …I do not ask for money, although I have need for it. I do not ask for meat, although I could do with some. I have only one request. And all I ask is that you remove the road block from my path!”

This Christmas we do not need your money and gifts. All we ask is for you to remove the obstacles you have set on our path! Is this too much to ask?

By MUTAHI NGUNYIPosted Saturday, December 20 2008 at 17:50