BY FRANCIS ILAHAKA
The long awaited nomination
among the major
political parties was held today
on 17 in preparation
to the forthcoming
general election on
march 4th which
In any
given society nomination is
the major pillar
of any election
given that if
not taken seriously
by political parties
leaders it can
splint political parties as
it happened during 1963 and in 1992.
This year nomination
is historical and
different in the
last 50 years because
it is the
first under new constitution in which per
law politicians are not
allowed to jump to
another political parties.
My Country Kenya
has history of
weak politicians paving way
for powerful politicians
eg in 1963 Oginga Odinga, James Gicuru and
Tom Mboya prepared way
for Jomo Kenyatta.
And during
Moi era weak politicians
without development agenda were
told to step down
and given jobs by the
state.
Going by
history the confusion during the just ended nomination is
part of Kenya election cultural
founded by Kenyatta, Odinga
, Gichuru and
Tom Mboya.
The following is the view of 1992
nomination which splint
the original FORD into
tribal groupings giving KANU
easy chance
Eight political parties, i.e. the Kenya African National
Union (KANU), Forum for the Restoration of Democracy (Asili) (FORD-A), Forum
for the Restoration of Democracy (Kenya) (FORD-K), the Democratic Party of
Kenya (DP), the Kenya National Congress (KNC), the Kenya Social Congress (KSC),
the Kenya National Democratic 'Alliance (KEND A) and the Party of Independent
Candidates of Kenya (PICK) participated in parliamentary and civic elections
while KANU, FORD-A, FORD-K, DP, KSC, KENDA, KNC and PICK participated also in
presidential elections. Eight parties then were involved in party nominations
for parliamentary and civic elections whereas five participated in
presidential nominations.
Earlier, we made the point
that party nominations were, through Act No. 1 of 1992, made the exclusive
province of each political party. This meant that each political party would
bear the expenses of organizing the preliminary elections. Previously the state
had borne the expense of this first stage of elections. Given the new
arrangement, the newer and poorer political parties could not organize a party
nomination exercise covering the entire country and this may, in part, account
for the reason why especially KNC, KSC, KENDA and PICK had relatively few
parliamentary and civic candidates. In many instances, aspiring candidates who
had been rejected by the main parties individually sought the smaller parties
for nominations.
The party nomination exercise ran into two technical legal
problems. According to the law only the Electoral Commission is empowered to
give a time span within which party nominations should occur. Such time span
begins to run after a gazette notice for the purpose is published, the period
between the publication of the notice and the party nomination being not less than 21 days. As early as
October 1992, KANU Headquarters instructed its district branches to embark on
the party nomination exercise. Other political parties followed-suit.
Technically then the process of party nomination was begun before the
Electoral Commission had given the go ahead. That part of the process which
began before the Electoral Commission had published the appropriate gazette
notice could, in strict law, be held to be null and void.
When the Electoral Commission
published the first gazette notice giving a period of 8 days within which to
"complete" party nominations, it was trying to legalize nomination
activity which had occurred before the notice. It is our contention that in
strict law, the notice could not save "nominations" which had
occurred in the absence of a gazette notice. Perhaps where parties had
concluded nominations before the gazette notice was published, it was
necessary for the nomination results to be adopted afresh in a meeting of the
relevant party organ. In our view, an individual who had been excluded in a
party nomination prior to the gazettement of the first notice of party
nominations, or even an individual who had not vied for nomination, could
successfully challenge such party nominations and have them re-opened.
The second technical problem
arose as a result of the extension of the party nomination exercise owing to
the successful challenge of the Attorney-General's "correction" of
Act No. 1 of 1992. The political parties had rushed through nominations in the
period given initially by the Electoral Commission.
This was an illegal, improper
period. When the proper period was given, this is the time within which
political parties should have repeated the nominations or at least adopted the
prior nominations. Technically, then, many party nominations could have been
exposed to legal challenge as to their validity owing to the problems created
by the Attorney-General and the Electoral Commission. Further, the confusion
surrounding the proper period of party nominations made some political parties
not to net the candidates that they could have if confusion did not surround
this period. On the positive side, the "extension" of nomination time
allowed the new parties to identify more candidates, especially those who had
not been adopted by KANU. It appears that KANU wished to conduct^arly party
nominations so that those incumbent MPs who held government positions and who
did not opt to vie for KANU nomination would be discarded from government and
suitable replacement sought in good time. This KANU strategy could have
prevented some KANU parliamentarians who wished to defect after parliament was
dissolved from defecting because they were forced to make up their minds in
advance.
It has to be pointed out that it was not proper, and,
perhaps, not legal, to authorize party nominations in advance of the
dissolution of parliament.
Due to the. unpreparedness within the parties and the
"confusion" created by the first party nomination notice, party
nominations did not proceed as smoothly as they could have for the following
reasons:
•
The
political parties did not always stick to their constitutionally laid down
machinery for nomination. Often such machinery, e.g. nomination by election
through party rank and file, proved long drawn and expensive. Often party
leadership chose or hand picked candidates.
•
After
regular nomination, some candidates were replaced by newcomer candidates-favored
by the party leadership. FORD-K, for example, found resistance when they tried
to replace duly nominated candidates who were thought to be plants from other
parties.
•
Controversy
about the accepted manner of party nomination was responsible, in part, for the
split in the original FORD. Two systems—direct election by party members and
delegates voting—were .preferred by two sections of the party. Due to lack of
consensus on this issue, FORD broke into two parties.
•
The
organization of party nomination elections and especially the actual polling
was, in many ways, flawed. Proper polling materials were not readily available,
i.e. ballot boxes and ballot papers. Venues were often changed at short notice
or none at all.
•
Nominations
of parliamentary and civic candidates before returning officers took place on
the 9th of December 1992. Earlier the chairman of the Electoral Commission had
publicly acknowledged the possibility of violence during nominations. He had
consequently assured members of the public that security would be beefed up to
ensure that no candidate would be physically prevented from presenting his/her
nomination papers. This exercise was supposed to take one day.
•
The
following day, Kenyans Were treated in the press to tales of some of the most
bizarre occurrences of violence
that had resulted in the failure of a number of candidates to present their
nomination papers. There were reports of kidnappings, blockades, actual beatings,
abductions and snatchings of nomination documents from agents of certain
candidates. In this whole scenario, the security apparatus appeared helpless.
No one was reported arrested or charged before a court of law for this perpetration
of violence. Three incidents are worthy of particular mention.
•
Many Kenyans
secured several party cards. As a result they could vote in party nominations
of more than one candidate. Often, aspiring candidates bought party cards and
distributed them to any willing person who would then vote for the candidate.
• A large percentage of
aspiring candidates moved from one party to the other with relative ease. For
them, party loyalty was subsidiary to getting party nomination.
Although we have raised the above general and some specific concerns
relating to the party nomination exercise, on the whole the aspiring candidates
and the political parties were satisfied with the manner in which the exercise
was conducted. This stage of the election did not, despite some of the
anomalies we have pointed out, attract, a lot of criticism by those concerned.
Perhaps the main reason for this reality was that the political parties had
substantial control over this phase of the election.
Nominations
Before Returning Officers
Turkana Central, an agent of a DP aspirant was physically prevented
from presenting nomination papers by an administration policeman who snatched
his briefcase in the presence of regular policemen. The briefcase was then
passed over to a driver of a government Land-Rover which sped off while the
police cocked their guns and pointed them at the agent.
The name of the policeman and the registration numbers of the government
vehicle were well documented in the daily press. The police officer who
committed this offence against democracy in Kenya was never charged in any
court of law. He has since been promoted to a higher rank.
In Baringo North, agents of a DP candidate were severely beaten, and
had nomination papers snatched from them, thus preventing the candidate from
availing himself of the opportunity to contest the general elections. A few
days thereafter, his home was razed down by arsonists who were never apprehended.
Francis ilahaka
is cultural writer currently working
on abook making
of Kenya Presidency from
Kenyatta to Mwai
Kibaki
Francisilahakai@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment