Tag Archives: The Hague

The Circus Is Coming to Town: Mr. Kenyatta Goes to The Hague Along with “Big Men” and Their Toadies

It now appears that President Uhuru Kenyatta will eschew the trappings of his office, even if it’s just for a few hours and appear before Ms. Fatou Bensouda and the presiding judges at The Hague not as the Commander-in-Chief of Kenya’s Armed Forces, but as a crimes-against-humanity suspect.

The symbolism of this moment is not lost on Kenyans and in keeping with the partisan divide this case has taken since it was first announced, there are those who will look at this moment as the day the one time high, mighty and untouchable of Kenyan society stood before a judge they could not cower or court system they could not manipulate to answer criminal charges against them. Conversely, there are others such as Moi University Lecturer of Media Studies Dr. Omanga who will see Mr. Kenyatta’s summons and appearance before the International Criminal Court (ICC) as classic Kabuki theater i.e. political and legal posturing by the courts ‘ere the inevitable triumph of “us” over “them”. In his article in the Daily Nation, the lecturer compares Mr. Kenyatta’s summons to The Hague as a mere show of valiancy by the world court in the face of pre-ordained defeat i.e. dismissal or indefinite suspension of the case against POK.

In keeping with the African tradition of story-telling to illustrate a point, Dr. Omanga “tanda wilis” the story about a leopard (Mr. Kenyatta) cornering a squirrel (ICC) for dinner; a showdown whose outcome is inevitable (death to the squirrel) or in this case dismissal or indefinite suspension of the case against POK.

True to the hubris and triumphalism reflected in the lecturer’s parable, Mr. Kenyatta is reportedly going to The Hague with a posse of over one hundred and twenty distinguished supporters and toadies. Included in the entourage are four heads of state, at least at last count and an assortment of hanger-ons and sycophants. There are also reports that Mr. Kenyatta will address the court. It is this combination of events that I want to see play out: Frankly I would pay top dollars (or shillings) to bear witness to the optics of (reluctant?) “big man” and budding Pan-Africanist Uhuru Kenyatta, urged on by the quintessential “big men” Presidents Pierre Nkurunziza of Burundi, Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni and Paul Kagame of Rwanda and their sycophants, going mano-a-mano with the hitherto unflappable daughter of Mali and Chief Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda.

I would advise Mr. Kenyatta to harness the collective jingoism of his supporters and caution them against making a public spectacle of themselves and by extension, of him, on the international stage no less. President Kenyatta has seemingly stabilized his presidency and has comported himself with a modicum of competence after a rather rough start. He should continue along that path and take a page from his deputy Mr. William Ruto who has conducted himself with aplomb worthy of a true Moran (tho’ mewonders whether he is actually Masai). The junior half of the digital duo his appeared before the chamber on schedule/as scheduled and for all the bluster and fury at the beginning of the trials, his supporters and their antics have avoided becoming THE news.

Mr. Kenyatta would also be ill-advised to use his chance to “address the court” as an opportunity to lay out his road-to-Jerusalem Pan-Africanist credentials. It is a message that is passé in this era of globalization not to mention information at the stroke of keys. The president should avoid getting on his soapbox and haranguing that the “ICC is a vestige of colonialism” and the other anti-western rant that are frankly hypocritical given his very western-leaning personal and business proclivities.

Indeed this Wednesday October 8th 2014 hearing may be Ms. Bensouda’s last hurrah in the case against Mr. Kenyatta. If that is the case, I would argue that the fact the process played out to its conclusion, the accusations and counter-accusations notwithstanding is something both sides can take “credit” for; as Pyrrhic a victory as it is for those who lost loved ones in the post-election violence of 2007/8.

I am glad that Mr. Uhuru Kenyatta, heir to a share of $600M fortune was compelled to use some of that money to defend himself against the “personal challenge” that somehow morphed into a national issue that brought Kenya on the verge of pulling out of the world courts, the backroom machinations and use of government resources aside.

Finally, it is my hope that these trials were collective shots across the bow of Africa’s “big men” that the era of wanton impunity especially against their people is over.

Leave a comment

Filed under Governance - Kenya, IDPs, International Criminal Court - ICC, Justice, Kenya

Never Again – Until Next Time

Back in September of 2013, I wrote a piece titled “The Hague Imefika” or “The Hague Has Arrived” where in response to the erratic commencement of the crimes against humanity cases against the three Kenyans charged, I offered that the cases against the deputy president Mr. Ruto could have started out “much smoother” and that Ms. Fatou Bensouda appeared “unprepared” to begin the cases. I also wrote that the high-priced lawyers, especially the ones representing the two principals, may successfully argue dismissal (of the cases); even acquittal for both the president and his deputy.

https://thetwoninetyonetracker.com/2013/09/18/the-hague-imefika/

In this updated reading of the tea leaves, I am offering that several recent developments all point to the possibility I reluctantly theorized late last year when the trials begun: That one of the two principals may be acquitted or have their case fully dismissed based on the following:

  • The January decision by the Chief Prosecutor to adjourn the case against Mr. Kenyatta, ostensibly to give her time to “obtain additional evidence and consider whether such evidence will fully meet the evidentiary threshold required at trial”.
  • The recently announced sequence of meetings held by the court during late January and early February 2014, not to mention the one scheduled for Thursday, February 13.
  • The recent announcement that suspect Mr. Kenyatta is “said to be on the invitation list” for the inaugural US-Africa Leaders’ Summit in Washington.
  • The apathetic mood of Kenyans, indeed Africans, towards the ICC: The accused may be scoundrels but they are OUR scoundrels!

http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/Now-Bensouda-wants-Uhuru-case-adjourned/-/1064/2119498/-/nufy37/-/index.html

http://standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000104110&story_title=another-uhuru-meeting-called-at-icc

http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Obama-invites-Uhuru-Kenyatta-to-US-summit/-/1056/2155432/-/14sp3l1z/-/index.html

http://iwpr.net/report-news/kenyan-support-icc-trials-falls

Given the foregoing, it is my opinion that the case against the senior half of the digital duo may be dropped for reasons that have very little to do with Mr. Kenyatta’s innocence and more to do with the politicization of the case as recently conceded by Mr. Ocampo; a scenario most Kenyans should be fully familiar with and that is always in the background in such high profile cases. Additionally, Mr. Kenyatta’s case may be dropped because he and his deputy Mr. Ruto were able to form a convenient and timely union – “coalition of the accused” – between their two populous communities and ride the “tyranny of numbers” to the 2012 presidency and deputy presidency respectively. The move was a masterstroke that dared their accuser – International Criminal Court (ICC) – to prosecute a sitting president and his deputy, the former a son of one of the founding members of Pan-African Movement. Calling their bluff and doing just that put the international organization in the crosshairs of the African Union (AU), an organization with a membership whose conduct, past and present, made the (ICC) court necessary. Sensing that they could be next, the big men of the AU formed yet another union aptly called “coalition of the threatened” less from the desire to do the right thing for their subjects and more out of self-preservation. The rest as they say is history.

As much as I was hoping for all the cases facing the Kenyan suspects to proceed i.e. be presented before the judges and heard to their conclusion replete with presentation of all available evidence, I have to respect, indeed commend Ms. Bensouda’s concession that she does not have the evidence to sustain the case. She does not have the evidence that will “meet the evidentiary threshold required at trial” not necessarily because the evidence does not exist, but because she is persecuting the very persons who control, thus can manipulate the levers that open or close access to said evidence!

The following comments made by the Victims’ Legal Representative Mr. Fergal Gaynor best capture the dilemma that faced Ms. Bensouda. The comments should also give pause to those interested in a Kenya, indeed an Africa where the rich and powerful are not above the law and are held to account by a fair and unfettered judicial process that cannot be blatantly manipulated.  Said Mr. Gaynor:

The fact remains that there was massive obstruction to availability of evidence from phone companies and the government. Nobody wants a conviction based on false evidence.

The Irish barrister went on to say that:

There have been unprecedented levels of witness intimidation and interference. The accused has devoted enormous resources to end the case. The national Commissioner of Police himself was charged but there was no interest in taking evidence which might implicate him. Little wonder that the Kenyatta case has suffered such devastating setbacks

http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/Uhuru-kenyatta-ICC-status-conference-bensouda-evidence/-/1064/2193582/-/qgv7naz/-/index.html

Echoing the very sentiments was a piece in the Global Post that wrote:

The five-year-long procedures in the Kenya cases have displayed all the court’s weak points and flaws, including its dependency on state cooperation for evidence collection, difficulties in protecting its witnesses and vulnerability to political pressures.

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/africa/kenya/140206/uhuru-kenyattas-trial-case-study-whats-wrong-the-icc

Finally, the man who set the ball rolling, the erstwhile Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court Argentinian Luis Moreno Ocampo offered a variant of what the piece in the Global Post and Mr. Gaynor both said:

….the Waki Commission…. gave a lot of evidence on Mr. Ruto and less on the atrocities allegedly perpetrated by Mr. Kenyatta…..(possibly) because Mr. Kenyatta was then in government which made it difficult for the Commission to gather sufficient evidence against him.

http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/Ocampo-Envoys-wanted-Uhuru-and-Ruto-out-of-polls/-/1064/2197348/-/14sap7sz/-/index.html

The foregoing assessments are sad indictments on an international community that has at one time or another invariably said “Never Again” in the wake of wide-spread atrocities and extensive human suffering. The post-election violence of 2007 caused the death of 1,300 innocent Kenyans and to-date, most (Kenyans) cannot identify or name any high-ranking official or anyone for that matter who has been brought to justice for said mayhem: I certainly cannot cite a pronouncement by Kenya’s courts pointing to actions against people charged with fomenting the violence of 2007/08.

That Mr. Kenyatta may beat back the charges he is facing at The Hague would be a disappointment, not only to me, but to those in Kiambaa, Kibera, Kisumu, Nakuru, Naivasha etc. who not only lost loved ones, but life-long accumulation of relations and property at the hands of events and individuals allegedly organized and funded by the two principals.

On the other hand and in a uniquely Kenyan and now international community meme, most will “accept and move on” from the tragedy of PEV-2007 to the next one – in South Sudan, Syria, Central African Republic etc.

Leave a comment

Filed under Kenya

Kenya looks in the mirror and sees South Sudan

Kenya’s president Mr. Uhuru Kenyatta expressed regret “…that the crisis in Southern Sudan, which started as a party dispute, had been portrayed as ethnic cleansing by the media, NGOs and others.” Mr. Kenyatta’s red herring came even as Mr. Salva Kiir, president of the troubled country “…called for an end to wanton killings and tribal-based atrocities.” Mr. Kiir’s call for an end to “tribal-based atrocities” belied claims by both Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Kiir that the conflict between the latter and Mr. Machar is “political and not tribal.”
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Leaders-seek-to-end-Juba-war/-/1056/2126162/-/geyuso/-/index.html
http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000100852&story_title=south-sudan-president-kiir-urges-end-to-tribal-atrocities
During the crisis meeting with the council of ministers of South Sudan at State House, Juba, Mr. Kenyatta, in his capacity as chairman of East African Community and ironically, a crimes-against-humanity suspect as well, accused the yet-to-be exposed “media”, “NGOs” and the nebulous “others” of characterizing the conflict between Salva Kiir and his former vice-president Riek Machar as a political stalement even as observers, aid workers and fleeing refugees reported atrocities including the discovery of mass graves, extrajudicial killings and rapes.
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/24/in-south-sudan-reports-of-massacres-and-mass-graves/?ref=africa
There is little doubt that the conflict in the continent’s newest nation is between two political rivals Mr. Kiir, who is from the Dinka ethnic majority and Mr. Machar, who is from the Nuer ethnic group; a group whose population is less than the Dinka’s. But as Kenya has amply demonstrated since independence, the conflict is primarily about power, of which political power is but one component. The crisis was sparked by fighting between Dinka and Nuer soldiers i.e. fighting between two distinct ethnic groups. The fighting between soldiers allied to the two ethnic groups then morphed into allegations of a coup, allegedly orchestrated by the ousted former vice-president Riek Machar, against the government of Salva Kiir. This allegation seemingly cemented the ethnic dimension of the conflict that many African leaders including Mr. Kenyatta were/are desperately trying to downplay if not deny outright. Lost in the blame-game and recriminations are the earlier actions of Mr. Kiir who, in July 2013, dismissed his vice-president Mr. Machar and the entire cabinet and went on to arrest the latter’s predominantly Nuer allies.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/27/world/africa/south-sudan-crisis.html?_r=0
The reality is that Mr. Kenyatta, as president of Kenya; a country with a past splattered with ethnic clashes is looking at the conflict in South Sudan and uncomfortably sees the country he presides over. The dynamics of the conflict between Mr. Kiir and Mr. Machar might as well be the dynamics of the conflicts between Jomo Kenyatta and his nemesis Jaramogi Oginga Odinga and the many variants of these two venerable figures of Kenya’s socio-political history. As recent as 2012, Mr. Uhuru Kenyatta himself had to form the Jubilee Coalition, effectively a “coalition of survival” with fellow crimes-against-humanity suspect and deputy president Mr. William Ruto. The marriage between Mr. Kenyatta’s The National Alliance (TNA) party and Mr. Ruto’s United Republican Party (URP) was a coalition that primarily pitted two ethnic groups – Kikuyu and Kalenjin – against a majority of the other ethnic groups in Kenya. And as is the case in South Sudan, distribution of the many permutations of “power” within members of TNA and URP has come under withering verbal attack from within; courtesy of Nandi Hills MP Mr. William Keter. Now as the father of modern war Mr. Karl von Clausewitz said, make that cautioned, war is the continuation of diplomacy/speechifying/policy by other means!
http://www.military-quotes.com/Clausewitz.htm
Before I am called an agitator or something less savory, let me categorically state that efforts at peace and conflict resolution by the delegation from the Intergovernmental Authority on Development and the council of ministers of South Sudan should be commended and supported: They are indeed timely. Mr. Kiir and Mr. Machar should set aside their “personal challenge”…er..make that “personal ambitions” and differences and put the well-being of the people of South Sudan first. Having said that, let me add that few African leaders – past and present – can deal with situations such as the one in South Sudan with the credibility the situations deserve not to mention looking extremely hypocritical like most of them did when trying to claim Nelson Mandela’s legacy.
The cynic in me sees President Kenyatta preaching peace and reconciliation between South Sudan’s Mr. Kiir and Mr. Machar while coalitions in his own backyard are clinging on to tenuous and fragile peace imposed on them by relentless pressure from the International Criminal Court! That Mr. Kenyatta has suggested “power-sharing” between Mr. Kiir and Mr. Machar as an option is the height of irony given the blistering attack the president’s own supporters launched against the power-sharing arrangement, derisively referred to as the “nusu mkate” arrangement, between Mr. Kibaki and Mr. Odinga back in 2008; an option that saved Kenya from further ETHNIC blood-letting even as it landed Mr. Kenyatta and his deputy Mr. Ruto at The Hague. The curmudgeon in me further argues that Mr. Kiir and Mr. Machar survey the regional landscape and see the evolution of Kenya, Uganda, Mali, CAR and the Democratic Republic of Congo and adduce that power indeed comes through the barrel of a gun or through the “tyranny of numbers”; the latter a coalition that effectively blunts efforts to arrest impunity. The two antagonists from South Sudan finally conclude that acquisition of said power enables them to have their turn at the trough of “uhuru” (pun unintended); a calculus unmistakably demonstrated by the father of the person now preaching peace and reconciliation between the warring parties of Africa and the world’s newest nation!
The mirror certainly does not lie.

Leave a comment

Filed under Kenya

Filling Mandela’s Shoes – Easier said than done!

As Africa, Africans and the international community join Mr. Nelson Madiba Mandela’s family and South Africa in mourning his passing; it is very interesting to see leaders of all strips falling over themselves to praise the fallen global icon. Over the years, Mr. Mandela evolved from a detainee; some would say “terrorist” to a prisoner-turned-Nobel Laureate-turned-president-turned-ex-president to a revered international icon whose funeral service commanded a gathering of the world’s most powerful and famous including four American presidents, one whose father is Luo! Madiba’s amazing life, legacy and now passing prompted me to take a closer look at some of the leaders now waxing poetic and eloquently about “their time with Nelson” or “their encounter with Madiba”. Senator Mike “Sonko” Mbuvi even went as far as photoshopping himself in a warm embrace with Madiba! http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/529059/20131210/nelson-mandela-photoshop-legacy-tribute-mike-sonko.html.
Mr. Mandela’s death also got me thinking about past leaders who have been held in the same stead as the man lovingly referred to as “Tata”, who unlike nearly all African leaders of his generation, served only ONE term as president of South Africa then STEPPED down voluntarily! I thought about leaders such as Ghana’s Kwame Nkrumah, Kenya’s Jomo Kenyatta, Tanzania’s Julius Nyerere and Zambia’s Kenneth Kaunda. Of the four Pan-Africanists, only Nyerere and Kaunda voluntarily stepped down from the presidency, the former in 1985 and the latter in 1991. Mr. Nkrumah was overthrown while on a visit to Asia and Mr. Kenyatta died in office, ostensibly on a “working vacation” in Mombasa.
While this piece is not a comparison between the afore-mentioned founders/leaders of the Pan-African Movement and Mr. Mandela, it allows one to place the latter alongside these leaders of yore who have been lionized, indeed deified either by the people they led, the African continent or the larger global community. I will say that the outpouring of love and affection for Nelson Mandela underscores that for a leader/president; especially of an African country, the man’s appeal is singularly unique and deservedly universal. Furthermore, Nelson Mandela’s global appeal is for the best of reasons, not the notoriety of most of his fellow (African) leaders – past and present. Close to one hundred heads of states spanning the entire spectrum of political persuasions attended his funeral services. America’s Barack Obama, the country’s 44th president placed Nelson Mandela alongside such revered figures as fellow Nobel Peace Prize recipients Civil Rights’ leader Dr. Martin Luther King and non-violence advocate Mahatma Gandhi and America’s Founding Fathers. To quote President Obama:
“(T)he struggle here against apartheid, for freedom, Madiba’s moral courage, his country’s historic transition to a free and democratic nation, has been a personal inspiration to me. It has been an inspiration to the world. The outpouring of love that we’ve seen in recent days shows that the triumph of Nelson Mandela and this nation speaks to something very deep in the human spirit — the yearning for justice and dignity that transcends boundaries of race and class and faith and country.”
http://www.nation.co.ke/News/africa/Obama-meets-family-of-ailing-hero-Mandela-/-/1066/1899202/-/bcbd1sz/-/index.html
America’s first black president also led the world in eulogizing the fallen global icon and South Africa’s first black president saying that “It is hard to eulogize any man…how much harder to do so for a giant of history.” In the same memorial service for Mr. Mandela and in keeping with the reconciliatory nature of the man, Barack Obama shook hands with perceived “enemies” of the United States President Uhuru Kenyatta and President Raul Castro of Cuba, much to the consternation, chagrin and wagging tongues of onlookers, pundits and spinmeisters alike.
http://www.nation.co.ke/news/Obama-leads-world-in-celebrating-Mandela/-/1056/2106878/-/qs3mjq/-/index.html
We now see all, including those who rule, have ruled, comport and have comported themselves in ways completely antithetical to what Mr. Mandela stood for tripping over one another to embrace the fallen nationalist and the principles he stood.
The current occupant of State House and crimes-against-humanity suspect Mr. Uhuru Kenyatta said that the former South Africa President “….had taught the world the strong virtues of humanity, which made him stand out.” Mr. Kenyatta went on to add that Mr. Mandela “…believed in the noble principles of equity, justice, cohesiveness and inclusiveness in governance. He had faith and confidence in the ability of his people to realize the dream of a free, united and prosperous South Africa.”
http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/mobile/?articleID=2000099552
Not to be left behind, the junior partner of the digital duo and fellow crimes-against-humanity suspect chimed in with the somber-sounding
“The world has lost a moral example of selfless leadership, a man of courage, principle and honor. The African Continent is poorer without Madiba. We are mourning a father to multiple generations of Africans. Madiba left a legacy of leadership and he was a shining example that we should all emulate.”
http://www.nation.co.ke/InDepth/-/490068/490832/-/hlndic/-/index.html
It is one thing to lather praise about the ideals enshrined in a document such as the Constitution or embodied in the legacy of a man such as Nelson Mandela. It is an entirely different ballgame to live one’s life and govern a polity to said ideals to wit I wonder whether Mr. Kenyatta and his sycophants would embody (honor?) Mr. Mandela by stepping down from the presidency AFTER one term! What of facing a “personal challenge” such as being charged – fairly or unfairly – head on without using a country’s limited resources and goodwill or without playing the “race card” to avoid facing said charges?
President Kenyatta opined rather eloquently that Mr. Mandela believed “…in the noble principles of equity, justice, cohesiveness and inclusiveness in governance…” yet he, Uhuru Kenyatta, is the willing and less-than-noble beneficiary of wealth and privilege, most obtained under dubious circumstances and through the less-than-cohesive and exclusive government of his father Jomo Kenyatta. Add to the hypocrisy of Mr. Kenyatta’s commendations of Mr. Mandela’s legacy of inclusiveness is the exclusivity of his Jubilee government; one whose composition is dominated by the two tribes that gave the party the winning majority in the 2013 elections.
Again I say: It is one thing to blame someone for the sins of their father. It is an entirely different discussion when the person being blamed for their father’s sins embraces, indeed embodies some of the very sins the father is accused of. Born into royalty, Mr. Mandela eschewed the trappings of the royal court and chose instead to lead a humble life “….sharing insights and listening to and learning from others” including those who had imprisoned and tormented him. Mandela grew up to govern South Africa by embracing former South African President William de Klerk; a man whose government continued his detention before releasing him in 1990. Mr. Mandela also embraced a political rival and founder of Inkatha Freedom Party Mr. Mangosuthu Buthelezi; appointing him as his Minister for Home Affairs and as acting president on more than one occasion!
Madiba also exemplified a quality that most leaders in Africa, certainly none of Kenya’s past presidents can even come close to personifying. In a segment on preparations for Mr. Mandela’s burial in his childhood home of Qunu, presenter Gregory Warner of radio station KQED FM88.5 marveled at the lack of ostentation, indeed underdeveloped state of the village of Qunu; ancestral home of South Africa’s first black president and the world’s most revered public figure of his generation! Mr. Warner reported that the roads leading up to Qunu had to be upgraded in preparation for Mandela’s funeral procession because they were not tarmacked and the recent rains in the area had made them virtually impassable! Additionally, Qunu did not reek of the one-sided allocation of developmental resources that was the hallmark of Kenya’s own founding father and his successors.
In response to reports of rampant corruption, cronyism, nepotism, poor governance and wealth disparity that pervades today’s South Africa, the country’s current president and archetypal “Big Man” Jacob Zuma was mercilessly booed by his countrymen/women gathered to pay respect to South Africa’s first black president and the very antithesis of said “Big Man” caricature Mr. Nelson Mandela. Adding insult to injury was the fact that Mr. Zuma was being booed by South Africans who had just enthusiastically cheered America’s first black president and the man Kenya’s current government has chosen to demonize for allegedly conspiring to have its leader (Mr. Kenyatta) and its deputy (Mr. Ruto) face charges at The Hague.
Mr. Jacob Zuma, a man two presidencies removed from Mr. Mandela’s tenure and is accused of unMandela-like behavior including allowing his South African government to support the even more unMandela-like charges both Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ruto are shamelessly trying to avoid answering for at The Hague was raucously booed by his countrymen/women even as Mr. Obama, the man whose American government is accused of pushing to have Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ruto answer the crimes they have been charged with received a prolonged and warm ovation.
The symbolism reflected in the dichotomous crowd reactions to American president Barack Obama and to the host country’s own Jacob Zuma should give pause to all those tripping over themselves to carry Madiba’s mantle including Mr. Kenyatta and Mr. Ruto. It is indeed a fitting bookend to Nelson Mandela’s legacy of what constitutes acceptable and unacceptable leadership.

Leave a comment

Filed under Kenya

Stop Politicizing the (fill in the blank)

President Uhuru Kenyatta has told his nemesis Raila Odinga to “stop politicizing” the land issue. http://www.news24.co.ke/National/News/Uhuru-tells-off-Raila-on-land-issue-20130902 The senior half of the digital duo also lambasted the vanquished head of CORD to stop politicizing the value-added Tax (VAT) recently implemented by Jubilee government. http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/business/2013/09/stop-politicizing-vat-law-uhuru-tells-raila/. And if that was not enough, The Hague-bound Son of Jomo may as well accuse Son of Jaramogi, his father’s chief rival, of engineering his summons, along with his deputy’s, to The Hague! http://www.nation.co.ke/news/politics/How+ICC+and+Raila+created+coalition+of+the+accused/-/1064/1634576/-/2r1hjxz/-/index.html Frankly I am waiting for Mr. Kenyatta and his sycophants to call on Mr. Odinga to “stop politicizing” the Syrian government’s alleged use of chemical weapons against the rebels!

The glaring irony is that the same man accusing his chief political enemy of politicizing land ownership, bread-and-butter/economic issues and the on-going trials at The Hague is in point of fact doing the very same thing: Talk about huevos or chutzpah!

Mr. Kenyatta recently “handed” out title deeds to folks in the voter-rich and CORD-leaning region of the Coast. http://standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000093358&story_title=disputes-stalk-president-uhuru-kenyatta-coast-title-deeds&pageNo=2 I am sure he did this out of the kindness of his heart and not because he was looking ahead to the 2018 elections. That Son of Jomo is incredibly altruistic!

The national budget delivered by Mr. Henry K. Rotich, President Kenyatta’s Cabinet Secretary for the National Treasury on June 13, 2013 outlined the broad development policies of the Jubilee coalition including its commitment to seal “…leakages in our revenue collection…and extending the tax base while ensuring efficiency in public expenditure.”http://www.businessdailyafrica.com/The+full+Kenya+Budget+speech+2013/-/539546/1881852/-/view/printVersion/-/535sgq/-/index.html. I am neither an economist nor an expert on budgetary matters but I interpreted the line about “extending the tax base” to mean implementation of a policy along the lines of a value added tax (VAT) the two scions of Kenya’s political titans are wrangling over.

Finally, the one issue that I would bet my Man U jersey keeps Kenyatta Fils awake at night is the one issue he, Mr. Kenyatta, used as a vehicle to Kenya’s presidency! Upon being accused of crimes against humanity by the Chief Prosecutor of the ICC Mr. Ocampo, Mr. Kenyatta and co-suspect Mr. Ruto formed a “coalition of the accused” and with his mother, Kenya’s former first lady Ms. Ngina Kenyatta leading the various “prayer rallies” across the populous regions of Central and Rift Valley, the two accused transformed the summons to The Hague into a tyranny of numbers all the way to Kenya’s presidency; the ultimate politicization of the charges facing the digital duo. http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/?articleID=2000032591&pageNo=1

UK is beginning to sound like George W. Bush and the Republicans, especially in the wake of the 9/11 tragedy when Son of Bush famously told those who decried his gun slinging response to the event and pursuant foreign policy that “they are with us or against us.”http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/11/06/gen.attack.on.terror/

 Anyone who questions Mr. Kenyatta’s policies or positions on issues of national import is either “a tool of the west,” “anti-development,” “un-patriotric,” “politicizing the issue” or engaging in some yet-to-be-named nefarious behavior.

Memo to Mr. Kenyatta:

As much as you and your supporters would love for him to go away, Raila Odinga is the face and voice of Kenya’s opposition. Like you, he is a politician and looks at most issues through a political lens. Mr. Odinga is as much a “patriot” and “development-minded” as you are. And incase y’all had forgotten, Mr. Odinga is also Kenyan!

Remind Kenyans again how you and William Ruto ended up winning the presidency, CJ Mutunga’s ruling notwithstanding?

What’s that?

You and Mr. Ruto had a “better vision for Kenya?”

Sure you did…and you were able to wrap that vision in an anti-ICC/anti-The Hague/Xenophobic shuka at the various “prayer rallies” held “throughout” the country all the way to the presidency. By running for the presidency despite the charges facing you and your running mate, you dared the criminal court to try (and convict) the president and deputy president of a member state. And while presidential campaigns are by “political”, you Mr. President have continued to wrap your presidency using the same shuka you used during the (political) campaign. You have continued to draw on the energy generated at the “prayer rallies” during the campaigns by continuing to politicize the issue.

“Jamba”, who recently took a position on charges facing him at The Hague…not as a “personal challenge”, but as the “duly elected president of the sovereign Republic of Kenya”? I will help you out: It is you. Mr. President, you famously said that the charges facing you at The Hague were “personal challenges” that will not spill over into your role if elected to the presidency. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/feb/11/kenya-elections-presidential-debate

Well sir you are now the president of Kenya.

That Kenya, ‘ere the decision by The Hague not to run your trial and that of your digital twin Mr. Ruto simultaneously, run the risk of being rudderless were you and Mr. Ruto to face the “foreigners” at the ICC at the same time is the direct result of your politicization of your (collective) charges.

Bw. Rais, it is disingenuous and blatantly hypocritical to accuse Mr. Odinga of “politicizing” issues that matter to Kenya and Kenyans even as you and your sycophants do the same.

Fool me once, shame on you

Fool me twice, shame on me

Fool me thrice; I must be Kenyan!

Leave a comment

Filed under 2013 Presidential Elections, Democracy, Elections, Failed State, Governance, Governance - Kenya, International Criminal Court - ICC, Justice, Kenya, Land, Land Ownership, Politics, The Hague

Liaisons Dangereuse: Kenya’s new BFFs

In the article titled “Kirubi joins Uhuru’s business entourage in China” in the August 17, 2013 issue of Capital News, the publication’s owner Mr. Chris Kirubi contends that “…it was time for Africa to look for new development partners who will strive to ensure that all parties get a fair share of the cake”.

http://www.capitalfm.co.ke/news/2013/08/kirubi-joins-uhurus-business-entourage-in-china/

This is a very interesting perspective from a man whose business empire was built courtesy of a system that restricted enjoyment of “matundu ya uhuru” to a handful of those connected to Kenya’s presidencies: the very antithesis of what the article is advocating! The distribution of Kenya’s national cake has historically been unfair and slanted in favor of specific tribes and regions – those in power or proximal to the center of power. Additionally, Mr. Kirubi’s call for “partners” that “ensure that all parties get a fair share…” reeks of contrivance given some of the business deals that built his wealth. Regarding privatization of Kenya’s telecommunication sector in, Charles Hornsby writes in his book Kenya: A history since Independence that “(T)he resulting dirty tricks and bribery allegation….led to a single preferred bidder, the Mount Kenya Consortium including wealthy…insider Chris Kirubi”; a “favoured son” who made his money in the 1980s and 1990s because of his association with then-president Moi. (pges. 642, 655). So much for giving all parties a fair share!

The tycoon then goes on to say that the west “focus(es) more on problem solving rather than helping ‘us’ develop” which begs the question: Whose responsibility is it to develop “us”? Added to this question is the raison d’etre of the current presidential junket to China and Russia. Why is Mr. Kenyatta, Mr. Kirubi and the other “tycoons” visiting these two emerging markets if not to seek their help in “helping us (Kenya) develop”?

It is disturbingly disingenuous for Mr. Kirubi to claim that western companies “pitched camp in Kenya…but there was still little to show for it” when the very core of his business empire is an off-shoot of western companies. DJ CK, as the budding media mogul is also known, acquired Haco Industries from a western country – Holland – in 1998 and built it into the powerhouse that it is by expanding its product line, hitherto predominated by American and British brands, to include indigenous consumer brands such as TCB and Palmers. The trajectory of Mr. Kirubi’s crown jewel belies the claim that there is “little to show for...” the long history of western involvement in Kenya’s economy. It is also a claim that seeks to minimize the main reasons why Kenya’s economy has lagged despite the history of western involvement: Corruption, tribalism and impunity.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/mfonobongnsehe/2011/11/16/meet-chris-kirubi-mr-kenya/

While I support the expansion of Kenya’s business relationships beyond the usual suspects i.e. western conglomerates, I think Mr. Kirubi is doing the country a disservice by pretending that the new relationships (with the Chinese and the Russians) are going to be different from the business relationships of yesteryears; deals between Kenya’s political elite and politically-connected and the west, especially Gt. Britain. The perspective that these new eastward looking unions are altruistic and will lead to fairer distribution of wealth and opportunities throughout Kenya is yet to be seen. These are liaisons dangereuse being pushed primarily by those trying to blunt the tough stance adopted by the west, USA and Gt. Britain in particular, with respect to the charges facing the president Mr. Kenyatta and his deputy Mr. Ruto at The Hague.

Mr. Kirubi’s conclusion that the new relationship with China is beneficial, presumably to Kenya, “(A)s long as it is equitable and Africa itself gains to the maximum…” is a perspective he should have applied in his stewardship of Uchumi, the supermarket chain he allegedly ran to the ground. It is a perspective belied by the analysis of Mr. Kirubi’s time as chairman of the board at the supermarket chain offered by Prof. Atieno Ndede Amadi in her book CHALLENGES OF THE DIGITAL AGE: An MIS Analysis Framework: The Case Study of a Retail Store Chain. Ms. Ndede Amadi writes that “Kirubi is pointed as the key to all the mess that led to the collapse of Uchumi.” (Pge. 34).

Finally and Mr. Kirubi’s personal ruminations notwithstanding, the call for an “equitable” relationship with China, not to mention one that allows “Africa itself to gain to the maximum” is a perspective that I hope will be reflected in the actual actions and policies of Mr. Kirubi and the country’s leadership as it fumbles and bumbles its way towards a second century of independence. 

Leave a comment

Filed under BRICs, China, Corruption, Democracy, Disparity - Income Distribution, Governance, Governance - Kenya, India, International Relations/Global Issues, Kenya, Politics, Russia, The Hague

The massive log in our collective eyes!

I am a Kenyan living in the United States and find the article by Ms. Muthoni Thangwa in the July 29th edition of Daily Nation to be laughable at worst and misleading, not to mention a case of deflection at best.

 http://www.nation.co.ke/blogs/-/634/1929974/-/view/asBlogPost/-/gepjjkz/-/index.html

God knows that America has its faults. This country has a very painful and sordid history; one that it continues to deal with to this very day as evidenced by the events at the center of Ms. Thangwa’s piece. It is a past AND present whose details I delve into in my book Wuodha: My journey from Kenya to these United States. However, the one thing America; the country I have called home for the past thirty-plus years has which the likes of Muthoni and her compatriots can only intellectualize and fantasize about is a system of governance that holds people, including the president of the country, not to mention their friends and family wholly accountable for their actions. And on a slight but pertinent digression, United States of America has institutions – judiciary, legislative, police and infrastructures – roads, railways, and buildings etc. that while far from perfect, make those in Kenya the very embodiment of a banana republic!

I do not agree with the verdict on the murder of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman. My disagreement with the verdict is however based on emotional considerations than on legal ones.

The fact is: a young man needlessly lost their life and his killer essentially walked away scot-free! I feel more for Trayvon’s parents and friends. I don’t feel for Zimmerman’s parents or friends. At least they still get to see him – he is alive even though he will forever be haunted by the fact that he took the life of another human – Thou shalt not kill. Finally, and adding insult to injury is the afore-mentioned history of racism and Jim Crowism in America, the south (Florida) in particular that African Americans have endured over the years. I therefore get the perception this verdict has created, not only throughout the world, but even here in America. I also get how the acquittal of Mr. Zimmerman for the murder of Mr. Martin has added to the narrative the Ms. Thangwa is working with. However bone-headed, the verdict was made within the confines of the existing law(s).

Having stated the fore-going, let me also state without any equivocation that Kenyans are as hypocritical a people as I have seen and I am Kenyan! I also know that I am generalizing, the very crime Ms. Thangwa commits in her piece! I also know that two wrongs don’t make a right! To which I say “oh well!”

The same yahoos screaming about racism and bigotry in America will shamelessly hack one another to death because they are “uncircumcised” and/or from the wrong tribe! The very folks shaking their fists at America about “due process” for Trayvon are the same ones who will turn right round and tell those who disagreed with the Supreme Court verdict during the 2013 presidential elections to “accept and move on“. The very Kenyans who bloviate about “human rights for Trayvon…and the hypocrisy of America..blah, blah, blah” are the same ones who will turn right round and throw stones at the International Criminal Court (ICC) for “going after their sons”, sons who are accused of organizing over 1200 Trayvon Martins for the very reason Ms. Thangwa is accusing America of – violating the human rights of the less powerful! Maybe Muthoni can tell her readers whether the human rights of the internally-displaced people (IDPs) were violated by “our sons” as charged by the ICC. What of the rights of Robert Ouko, Tom Mboya, Pio G. Pinto, JM Kariuki?

In the 2012 US elections, there was a report of Kenyans, now naturalized American citizens who could not countenance voting for America’s first non-white president because he “…had Luo blood in him” courtesy of his father Barack Obama Sr.; the very definition of “judging someone by the color of their skin, not the content of their character!” These are the very people who will turn right round and tell those who accuse Uhuru of being the recipient of ill-gotten gains courtesy of his father Jomo “not to blame the son for the sins of the father.”

http://www.kenyan-post.com/2012/11/kikuyus-here-in-us-did-not-vote-for.html  

The very Kenyans who have no compunction about “toaring kitu kidogo” i.e. offering a small bribe or conversely asking someone seeking service to “ongea vizuru” i.e. give a bribe for said service will take to the streets to complain about “MPigs” or castigate the International Criminal Courts for “finishing off their sons and daughters”. It is this hypocrisy and double-standard that has resulted in a country and a people as synonymous with winning the Boston Marathon as it is/they are with corruption and impunity!

I challenge Kenyans, who are notoriously religious, are prone to being “born again Christian” and are religious (no pun intended) attendants of “prayer rallies” to follow the very teachings of their holy book The Bible and look at the log in their eyes before pointing out the sliver in the eyes of others!

Leave a comment

Filed under Corruption, Democracy, Governance - Kenya, IDPs, International Criminal Court - ICC, International Relations/Global Issues, Justice, Kenya, Law & Order, Life, Politics, Race, Racial Discrimination, Racism, The Hague, Trayvon Martin, Tribalism, Tribe