Transitional government the way out of current crisis
As former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan and his team continue with their efforts to find a political solution to the Kenyan crisis, other analysts see a transitional government as the way out of the current stalemate in Kenya occasioned by disputed presidential poll results. “The ultimate solution lies in the formation of a transitional government that would be mandated to effect a constitutional review to address the long term structural defects which have resulted in the current crisis”, observes Mr Ken Mutuma, Deputy Head, Governance of Africa’s Resources Project at the South African Institute of International Affairs (Saiia).
According to Mr Mutuma, such a transitional government should be composed of members of both the party of National Unity (PNU) and the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) and work within a given time-line to have a new constitution (undertake electoral reform etc), under which elections can then be called. “During this period”, says Mr Mutuma, “a truth, reconciliation and justice commission should be set up to address past and present injustices and to ensure that perpetrators of the current violence are brought to book. Indeed both ODM and PNU have called for the establishment of a truth, justice and reconciliation commission but are still deadlocked on power sharing modalities. Whereas ODM is ready for a grand coalition as proposed by Annan, PNU insists that ODM take up its place as official opposition in parliament.
On the role Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka would play in the mediation process, Mr Mutuma argues that it is possible that Kalonzo may have played a more formidable role as a mediator, had he not accepted his appointment to government. This, however, is not guaranteed, owing to the acrimonious manner in which Kalonzo and his rival, Odinga, separated from each other prior to the elections. A national dialogue committee appointed by President Kibaki and to be chaired by Kalonzo has not started its work.
And what role would Uganda’s President Yoweri Museveni play in resolving the current impasse? According to Mr Mutuma, by speedily congratulating Kibaki on his reappointment, Museveni has certainly compromised his role as a mediator in the current crisis. This factor, coupled with his own allegation of electoral fraud during the 2005 Uganda election, has made it difficult for the opposition to view him as an acceptable mediator. That being said, it is also clear that there have been numerous fingers pointed at the East African Community (EAC) for its shameful silence during the current episode. As the EAC Chair, his swift action offering himself as a mediator could be seen in this regard, even though the timing at which he attempted to assist the parties speaks volumes about his true motives. Still, the role of EAC in unlocking the current stalemate cannot be understated. “Whatever the initiatives that already present, it will be necessary to involve the presence of the EAC in some form or the other, particularly given the ambition of these countries to move, in the long term, towards a political federation. It is understandable, that Uganda, having been affected by the crisis most, would want to play a role in expediting the current stalemate”, Mr Mutuma asserts.
The ultimate solution, according to Mr Mutuma, lies in addressing the three forms of violence that erupted soon after the controversial results were announced. According to him, there was violence in the slums, spontaneous violence by Raila Odinga’s angry supporters in Kisumu city and organised violence in the Rift Valley town of Eldoret and more recently, Nakuru and Naivasha.
Mr Mutuma traces the reasons for each type of violence to a combination of historical and constitutional factors. Noting that in the lead-up to the 1992 and 1997 general elections, there were similar actions labelled ethnic cleansing, Mr Mutuma says that
in 1992, during the first multi-party elections, the impact of such violence was said to have resulted in the killing of 600 people. Media coverage given then was quite modest - unlike the current scenario. “As with then, the killings in the Rift Valley appear to be the work of organised groups with objective of targeting specific ethnic communities they consider foreign to the region”, Mr Mutuma claims.
“In Rift Valley, the home province of former president Daniel arap Moi’s Kalenjin tribe, Kalenjins were incited against "foreign" ethnic groups, sometimes on the basis of past injustices occuring from post independence agrarian reform programme”, he adds. Mr Mutuma argues that the ultimate objective was to alter the demographics of the area, since certain "foreign communities" were seen as supportive of opponents of the Moi Kalenjin regime. The aim, according to Mr Mutuma, “was to push such communities out to prevent possible presidential contenders from obtaining the mandatory constitutional requirements of 25 per cent of votes from five provinces”. Mr Mutuma further observes that the voting patterns following the December 2007 elections suggest that strongholds in which the Kikuyu are predominant (such as Nakuru, Molo, Naivasha) supported Kibaki. “This, alongside what many Kalenjins within the region perceive to be the unjust enrichment of Kikuyus in the region due to unjust historical factors (during the post colonial land reform policy under Kenyatta (a Kikuyu)), may offer a sound explanation to the systematic nature of the killings taking place - which target one ethnic group”, he asserts.
As regards violence in Nyanza province, Mr Mutuma attributes the intensity of the violence meted out to Kikuyus in Luo Nyanza to the historical tensions between the two tribes. Other than the brief period preceding 2002 elections, where Raila supported Kibaki, these two communities have a history animosity based on the post independence rivalry between Kenyatta and Jaramogi Odinga (Raila’s father). Given the manner that the campaign forged by ODM was run (what some allege to be anti-kikuyu sentiment), the denial of the presidency to Odinga (and more particularly by a Kibaki, a kikuyu), revived age old animosity and mistrust, which resulted in the violence witnessed. In Mr Mutuma’s opinion, this violence, unlike the acts witnessed in the Rift Valley which appear pre-planned and organised, has been more or less an angry and spontaneous reaction to what many view as election theft. He backs up his assertions by the response to the wave of violence in Kisumu (as well as the slums in Nairobi), where there have been clear incidents of police brutality, operating under shoot to kill orders, mainly targeting demonstrators and resulting in a sizeable number of deaths.
Mr Mutuma also attributes the current wave of violence to constitutional factors. The main flaw of the current constitution is the manner in which power is centralised in the presidency. “The president has enormous powers such as the powers to appoint key figures, allot land etc. For this reason, the presidency has come to be viewed, particularly by the large ethnic communities in Kenya, as a prize to be sought after in order to acquire access to resources on behalf of one community. It is questionable whether this picture is altogether accurate given that Moi was president for 24 years and appointed many of his ethnic Kalenjin community to political office, and still failed to make measured progress or benefits to his home district”, he says adding: “All the same, this constitutional hiccup has led to the entrenchment of a tribal pattern of voting, where elections are viewed as contests between tribes for the ultimate prize. It is no secret that both factions, that are part of the current stalemate, sought to exploit this inherent limitation in mobilising support”. Mr Mutuma notes that Raila's ODM consisted of a coalition of three predominant tribes the Luo, Luhya and Kalenjin (as well as other minority tribes), who run a campaign against what was widely perceived as the entrenchment of Kikuyus in leadership. Kibaki on the other hand rallied support of his Kikuyu tribe and other related tribes, such as the Meru and Embu.
Further, Mr Mutuma argues that centralisation of power and natural resources as provided in the constitution, has also given the impression that those closer to central government have greater access to the national cake. An additional angle to this, which makes it clear to understand the violence in the slums, is the fact that central government policy since the turn of independence, has resulted in an inhuman form of capital, which manifests itself in great extremes of inequality. The sprawling slums adjacent to posh upmarket residential areas are a clear indication of the high levels of inequality. In such circumstances, it is quite comprehensible, why the masses of the poor, who have practically nothing to lose, would take to looting and other acts of violence upon the slightest inducement (such as the irregularities flowing from the disputed presidential elections.
Despite an earlier assumption that a face-to-face meeting between Kibaki and Raila would solve the crisis, more violence erupted in Nakuru and later Naivasha soon after their meeting. Mr Mutuma attributes heightened tensions to the fact is that both leaders are surrounded by a number of hardliners who, through their public utterances, are hindering a political settlement. He cites recent utterances by ministers John Michuki, Martha Karua and Amos Kimunya, restating the initial position of the government i.e. recognition of Kibaki and use of the courts etc, which, in a way, frustrate the ongoing mediation efforts.
According to Mr Mutuma, these attitudes could be observed in the speeches given by both antagonists during the symbolic handshaking ceremony. Kibaki, making reference to himself as the “duly elected president”, called for a cessation of violence and promised the resettlement of the displaced back to Rift Valley, with a clear emphasis on the right of all Kenyans to live anywhere in the country. Raila, on his part, stated that he and "Hon. Mwai Kibaki” would work for peace and justice - which in many ways could be read as indication of the electoral fraud that had taken place. “It is possible the recent violence in Nakuru and Naivasha can be seen in this context. Both towns, while being cosmopolitan, are predominantly Kikuyu (unlike the other towns where violence in the Rift Valley has taken place)”, Mr Mutuma opines.