Kibaki: the guile old political hand and Kenyans love for raucous politicians

By Kipkenda Maimi

Read more...

Noraf Lecture Series: The Land Question in Kenya

By Pastor Peter Chemaswet

1.0 Introduction: Historical perspective on Land problem in Kenya

Kenya today experiences a myriad of socioeconomic problems. One of the major problems revolves around land. There has been sporadic tribal animosity that has persisted particularly in the Rift Valley. Many explanation has been suggested has being behind this problem. The common explanation is that the fighting is due to who is the president. This is a complete fallacy. Most of Kenya’s socioeconomic and political problems have to do with the land question.

The land question dates back to the coming of the British in early 18th century when they settled in Kenya. In the Rift Valley, the first case of fighting related to land began in early 1895 termed the Nandi Resistance that lasted for over 10 years culminating in the killing of the Orkoiyot Samoei in 1905.The Nandi resisted British occupation of their land. They defended it vigorously not withstanding their inferior weapons. They relied heavily on their intelligence network as organized by the Orkoiyot and his team of maotik. This was the longest resistance ever in the entire British Dominion in the world, not matched by any other resistance elsewhere. The Zulu, known as one of the fiercest warriors could not match the Nandi. They tried to but only lasted for some months before they were subdued. The West African countries could not put up a fight because they were divided people. The Maji Maji rebellion, the Hehe and their cousins Wabena rebelled against the Germans but were repulsed within months and their leader Kinyi Kitile was captured and was beheaded.

It has been claimed elsewhere that the Nandi resisted British occupation because they were anti development. This too is a fallacy. Nandi’s never fought colonialists because they did not want the railway cross their land but because the British were encroaching on their land. In fact the Kalenjins were a development conscious people as shown by their various specializations per clan. Each clan was specializing in a given field for the good and development of the whole community. The Talai produced orkoik who provided not only spiritual guidance but also political and military guidance. Other clans were charged with other responsibilities. For example, others were blacksmiths, while others were medicine men. Indeed, the Nandi economy was well developed. They had a lot of cattle, and had developed a system of storing food during harvest time at one place for future use, particularly to cushion against drought. For example Koilegen Arap Kipchomber son of Kipmnyole Arap Turgat did this in the Kipsisgis land, the Lembus and Kakimor Tugen around Sigoro in Eldama Ravine.

2.0 The Land Question in Kenya : Before the British Occupation

Kenya as a nation never existed. It was a creation of the colonist. All communities living in the present day Kenya lived in harmony and respect for each other. Each knew their boundaries. The Kalenjin of Elgon knew that their land reached Tulwoni Toror or tulwet tap Kinet (Tororo of Uganda) to the west and to the south west of Kapyomat hills near Busia and to the north Lelon. The Sengwer‘s region was to the north from suam river to Kongolai up to Lelon down river Chemaket(Tributary of Moiben River) and river Kuporom( NzoiaRiver) through Kiribotiet(Webuye).

Reference is made to the various writers on how modern day Kenya communities occupied their present territories. Prof. Bethwel Ogot acknowledges that the Kalenjin were the first to arrive in this country followed by the Masaai. They occupied the region all the way from Mt. Kenya to Mt. Elgon. This is further acknowledged by prof. Geoffrey Mureithi who says that when Agikuyu arrived at Mukuruinni wa nya gathanga, they met people called Barbaek or Barbiu, Gumba and Ogiek around Mt. Kenya.

The other communities arrived and occupied their present territories. For example the Luos and Luyias of Kakamega.

3.0 The Land Question in Kenya : During the British Occupation

As said earlier before the coming of the colonialist, every community lived within their borders and respected their tribal boundaries. Unfortunately the colonialist disturbed this harmony. Initially, they tried to work with the existing leaders, but these refused to carry out the orders of the British. As a result, the British had to create their own community leaders who were ready to obey them. These were the collaborators who worked hand in hand with colonist to grab the best land from the local people. Indeed the British were the first to create Internally Displaced People (IDP) Camps (Reserves). In order to understand, it is important to know how the British operated in grabbing the best land. As pointed out, they worked with collaborators by disregarding the tribal leaders chosen by the people. Instead, they created their own paramount chiefs who then signed off the tribal land to the IBEA or the colonist. The good thing is that the British always chose indigenous people to lead as paramount chiefs. They retained those who collaborated and replaced those who resisted. The collaborators were those who signed off their land and people to British rule. At the coming of the British the following were some of the key leaders that their various communities respected, and which the British appointed as Paramount chiefs.

3.1 Paramount Chief Waiyaki

Chief Waiyaki was a Kalenjin (Ogiek) whose real name was Arap Koiyoki. The Masaai called him Koiyaki ole Lemotaka while Kikuyu called him Waiyaki wa Hinga. He was a respected leader accepted by the three neighboring communities. The Maasais recognized his leadership abilities, and so did the Kikuyu. However he really was an Ogiek.

Prof. Mureithi refers to this Chief Waiyaki as follows; “Koiyaki’s wife was called Tiebo while his Father was called Kumale Ole Lemotaka Koiyaki.” The IBEA appointed him as Chief of Kiambu in 1895. Austin, one of the British Commissioner proves that he is an Okiot. The Okiek attacked the British post at kiambu. As a result on 14 Aug 1892 Waiyaki was arrested by Mr. Purkiss who chained him on a flag post the whole night. Indeed Waiyaki refused to collaborate with the British after being made a paramount Chief. In fact he was detained and later buried alive in Kibwezi, head upside down.

3.2 Other Paramount Chiefs

Olonana was appointed Masaai Chief for the region of Ngong Oldonyo Muny, while his brother Sendeu was appointed the chief of Loita Masaai’s. Sururu ole Tiwas was appointed Paramount Chief for the region starting in Sururu to Teret (Nakuru). Arap Rigaa was appointed Chief of Ole Nguruone. Later in 1952 Kiplaitim was appointed Chief to replace him. Chiefs around Koibatek were Arap Motingo Kiptegan (motingo clan) Chepchilat Koibat (Motingo clan); Arap Tango of Tango clan was appointed Chief of Tinet Timboroa.

Kipchomber Arap Koilegen was the Chief of the entire Kipsigis land to Rumuruti. He also covered the entire Tugen land Mbarbarani Samoei arap Koitalel was the Chief of the Nandi

3.3 Chiefs in other Regions

In Kisumu the chief was Gunda Mera, while in Luhya it was Mumia of wanga. In Bongom (Bungoma) Kimengich arap Buraru was the Chief. He signed a treaty with the British on 02/02/1890 placing himself and all his subjects under British rule. Evidence of this is found in the Kenya National Archives for the various treaties purported to have been made by African chiefs subjecting themselves to British rule. In Trans-Nzoia — Kapchepkoilel, Arap Kesis the son of Arap Chepkembe of Kapsurum clan was the Chief of Koony in Kitale, while in Cherangany — Sengwer, Arap Musseiin was the Chief of the region from Moiben hills to Kongolai in Kachelibai.

4. The British Land Grabbing History

4.1 The beginning of British Settlements

At Kiambu the Kikuyus who were cultivators were hiring land from Ogiek who were pastoralists. They were not buying from them. This is confirmed by Mr. D cluck in 1932-33 Morris Carter Land Commission. Upon the coming of the British, the Ogiek Land was grabbed by the Kikuyus through the collaborating Chief. They later sold this land the region of Kiambu to Tigoni. This is according to Richard Frost in his book “Race against Time”

4.2 1905 and 1911 Land Agreement

This agreement was between the Masaai and the settlers. It opened a door for the British to occupy the land of the entire Laikipia. In Rumuriti they found a Kalenjin speaking people who were the Tugens and Pokots. These people were occupying the region from Rumuruti, Thomson falls down to Baringo. This explains why Baringo district originally started from Rumuruti until Mzee Kenyatta separated it later. Indeed a Book titled Lunatic Express confirms that the Kalenjin speaking people occupied the region from Naivasha in the East to Suam in the West.

4.3 Other British Settlement and Internal displacement of local people in the Rift Valley.

At Makaliak river that is within Njoro Sururu, the Okiek, Tugen and Kipsigis lived together in harmony. Lord Egerton displaced these people Lord Egerton moved Kalenjin from this land many of our people were killed. In Kipkelion the Kipsigis were moved to Koru and Soot (present day Bomet Chepalungu area) while the Tugen were moved to Koibatek (Dry areas of Koibatek away from Eldama Ravine area). This eviction was so bad. Lives were lost and property was destroyed. It can be likened to the eviction that was during the Mfakane of South Africa.

The Nandi who lived in the region of Ket barak (Nandi hills) were moved to Kabiyet, while others were evicted to Kapchepkoilel (Trans Nzoia) and Amaiya (Laikipia). Arap Manyei (Parsirian) the son of Mbarabani Koitalel Somoei tried to resist this eviction but was later overpowered. He later safely led his people to reserved region. This was in the 1920s. In fact Arap Manyei was later detained until 1962, becoming the longest detainee in Kenya’s history.

The other Kipsisgis were evicted to pave way for multi-national tea estates. They were moved to the dry areas of Belgut (Soin area). Others were forced to Tanganyika between the Barbaek and Tatirek (Wanyaturu land). Some of these people moved to Laikipia and were joined by the Nandi

4.4 The Koony and the Sengwer

The Koony people are a group of people that the British erroneously called the Elgon Masai. These people were the original occupiers of present day Trans Nzoia with their close cousins the Sengwer to the East of Mt Elgon. The Pokots were living to the North (Kapkoi area). The British evicted them beginning in the 1920’s. In fact this eviction was nick named KOONY FUNGA TWENDE. The second major eviction took place from 1930 to 1940. They were forced to move to Kilgoris, others joined the Nandi into the Mara region of Tanganyika. Another group moved to Kapenguria through to Sebei in Uganda. Others went to Busoga through Tororo and further to the Western part of Uganda the Mabarara.

The Sengwer were forced to be assimilated into Pokot, Marakwet and Keiyo. Their land was divided into three districts, namely Trans Nzoia, West Pokot and Elegyo Marakwet

4.5 Where were the Kikuyus?

As far as Rift Valley is concerned, where was the Kikuyu in Rift Valley during the British scramble for Rift Valley Land? “Mr. Richard Frost in his book race against time page 107 paragraph 11 says that the Kikuyu never lived beyond the Abardare range. None was found in the Rift valley”. Mr. Frost continues to say that the Kikuyu land was so small. He claims that it was the British rule that enabled the Kikuyu to increase in number. He said this “the establishment of European government in fact enabled the Kikuyus to advance into the land from which the Masaai had previously barred them. Soon they had dispersed over much greater land than they had occupied before the advancement of the British rule.

Indeed it is right to say that the British that gave the leeway to the Kikuyus to move into the Rift valley. They rode on their master back to get what was not originally theirs. This was further reinforced after independence.

5.0 The Struggle for Independence.

Generally the efforts to fight against British rule were started by almost every tribe in Kenya. The key issue in this struggle was Land alienation by the British in addition to forced labor, hut tax and general oppression of the Africans as though they were second rate Citizens. As earlier pointed out, this struggle was started by the Nandis in the lat 1890 and began to pick up in other regions from the early 1900. Tribal associations were begun to try and push the British out of the country. These efforts gathered strength after the second world war’ The African Kenyan soldiers returning from the War had witnessed for themselves that the British were not superior after all. They began to get organized. Majority of this who has been conscripted were of course the Kikuyu. These were able to organize and form a stronger movement than other tribes who were less in number. As a result movements like Mau Mau, Kavirondo Tax Payer in Nyanza, and Western Kalenjin Congress among others.

They key issue in this struggle was the call to the British to leave the African Land and go back to their homeland. Indeed the politics of Kenya before and after independence always revolved on issues of Land and Land Rights. The Lancaster House deliberation was land and land rights. Indeed the Lancaster participants debated on how they were going to divide the regained land. The Kalenjins, Maasai and Mijikenda put up a strong case for their land in Rift valley and coast region. It was agreed in the 1961 and 1962 deliberations that all British grabbed land were to revert back to the local communities. Indeed this was promised by Mzee Kenyatta himself on 5th February 1962 upon arrival from Lancaster. He said;

“Katika Katiba Mpya, Serikali Yenu imeahidi kwamba kila sehemu ya nchi kama ni ya Maasai, itakaa kama ilivyo, ikitawaliwa na Maasai wenyewe.... Kama ya Wanandi, wanandi watatawala nchi yao, hiyo ni kusema ardi yao. Hakuna mtu kutoka inje kwenda kunyakua mali yao. Mashamba yao ni shauri yao kujua watafanya nini nayo”

The Law

Unfortunately this was never to be once Kenya attained independence in 1963. The events after independence further deteriorated the land problem in Kenya as we shall see from the evidence of the Kenyatta era.

6.0 The Kenyatta Era

6.1 The early days of independence.

Immediately after independence, there was great expectation and jubilation among the people. While the people celebrated the independence, some key people were working behind the scenes together with the British to re- grab the land. An elaborate scheme was hatched led by the former home guards from Central Kenya to buy land from the British and allocate it to themselves and their henchmen. They consolidated land in central province and displaced their own people into the Rift Valley. For example they transferred part of Rift Valley into Central Province and

named it Nyandarua district. This was allocated only to Kikuyu. The Luos were also rewarded for supporting KANU, and 650,000 acres of Nandi Land was transferred to Luo Nyanza. Another 850,000 acres of Nandi and Koony land was hived off and annexed to Western Province to form part of Bungoma. Other thousands of acres were transferred from Kipsigis land to Kisii Nyanza (from Keroka to Chebilat). This was a shock to the Kalenjin community because Kenyatta negated his earlier promise of 1962.

6.2 How Land was allocated in the 1960’s to late 1970’s

(i) Nakuru and Nandi

The destruction of forests was started during this period. The GEMA community cleared the forests in Narok district between Enengetia-Enabelbel. This was a thick forested area which was part of the larger Mau. Ole Ntimama who was a councillor in Narok at that time tried to oppose the settlement of GEMA in Narok, but the then Rift Valley PC Mr. Mathenge ordered his arrest. The then Dc Narok Mr. Julius Kobia was express orders to eliminate (kill) any Masai morans who opposed the settlement of GEMA in that area.

During the same period, the Nandis wanted to buy land in Tinderet, their ancestral land, but were denied. Mr. Mathenge frustrated them, and were arrested together with their leader, the then MP Hon Seroney.

Another bitter example of how the Kalenjins was denied their land right involved the RHONDA FARM in Nakuru. The Kalenjin Enterprise had bought the land, but PC Mathenge engineered its grabbing and was later subdivided among the GEMA members called Mwarigi. No money was refunded to the Kalenjin enterprises.

During this time the Kalenjins negotiated to buy NGATA FARM LTD led by Kibowen Arap Komen who paid Kshs 4million, but they were denied to buy the entire farm by PC Mathenge. He gave part of the land to GEMA people.

In 1974 Hon Eric Bomet and Mzee Jonah Arap Cheptoo negotiated to buy MAKUTANO FARM from Mr. PEARCSON (Maji Mazuri), but the DC Baringo Mr. A N N Ndoro ordered the arrest of the two who were locked up at Eldama Ravine. The land was later sold to GEMA people IGURE, hence IGURE FARM. Other areas included a farm in lower Subukia, Olmomoi. After the Kalenjins had bought the land, they moved in only for them to be arrested together with the initiates (TARUSIEK) who were still recovering. They were brought to Nakuru court and ordered to be jailed. Their money was never refunded.

As if this was not enough in 1970 Mzee Kenyatta came to Nakuru, Mob area (originally kuresoi land of the kipsigis and ogiek before British invasion) and distributed 17 former white settler farms to GEMA people who gave their tribal name, thereby erasing its true origin. The 17 farms were namely:

1. Kiambereria
2. Kiambu
3. Ngema
4. Moto
5. Nyakinyua
6. Kererekamia
7. Kamwaura
8. Poron
9. Mushorwe
10. Kapkimani
11. Kathirika
12. Kimkasa
13. Sitoito
14. Tamnyota
15. Mutukanio
16. Matunda
17. Marwa

On 10th March 1977, PC Mathenge used the Ngoroko Squad to burn down houses belonging to ogiek and kipsigis in Tinet area. Whoever was arrested was fined ksh. 800. Their cattle was confiscated and sold for kshs 20 per cow and kshs 2 per sheep or goat. Many people were shot and killed. One Mzee (Arap Mosonik, the father of Arap Too) was burned alive in his house

(ii) Uasin Gishu and Trans Nzoia

In the 1970’s Kenyatta gave out the following farms in Trans Nzoia to GEMA

instead of the local people the Kony and Sengwer and the Pokots:

1. Kiambu Farm
2. Monyaka Farm
3. Aruba Farm
4. Makutano
5. Makunga
6. Mucharage
7. Kitwamba

In Uasin Gishu farms were too allocated to GEMA instead of to the Nandi. These were:

1. Kiambaa
2. Kimumu
3. Timboroa( the forest was destroyed in the name of shamba system)

7.0 The Moi Era

Mzee Moi followed Kenyatta. Indeed he created the Slogan FUATA NYAYO. He truly followed Kenyatta’s footsteps and further complicated the Land problem. Just as Kenyatta rewarded his henchmen, so did Moi. He excised part of the forests and allocated it to some GEMA people who were his henchmen including some of his own politically correct Kalenjins. Most of these were done in the name of resettling squatters and the land less. The following Forests were excised off by both Moi and Kenyatta:

1. Aberdare Forest to create Mikaro Settlement Scheme
2. Old Sagana in Mt Kenya
3. Kinare
4. Sagana in Nyeri Mt Kenya 717 Ha
5. Kambi uhuru Mt Kenya 600 ha
6. Mautuma forest Ndalu in Western Kenya 1600 Ha
7. Mukogodo in Laikipia 15,000 Ha
8. Geta 4,340 Ha Arberdare Forest.
9. Mau Forest( Mwisho wa Lami, Njoro, Mob, Kibunja)
10. Mau Forest ( Sururu, Likias,Teret, Nessuit, Ngongongeri, Marishoni, Ndoinet, Saina, Kiptagich Ext, Tinet, Baraget,Kapsitai, Elburgon,

8.0 Conclusion

The Land issue in the Rift Valley is very emotive because of all the above outlined events. The people of Rift Valley, particularly the Kalenjin and Maasai feel shortchanged. They are a bitter lot. This bitterness is compounded by the rising poverty levels and unemployment among the youths. Indeed the tribal animosities in the Rift valley as reflected during the tribal clashes has very little to do with politics. Politics simply provide the avenue for venting their frustrations. It is their way of creating attention to this historical injustice on land. Until this problem is faced squarely and truly, peace in the Rift Valley will remain elusive.

9.0 Way forward/ Recommendations

• Agenda 4. This is a critical issue that will help to address this problem. It requires urgent attention in order to resolve it once and for all.
• The TJRC mandate should include the pre independence time to date. It should not be limited to post election violence of 2007 only but go back in time to include atrocities committed by the colonialist, Kenyatta, Moi and Kibaki eras.
• Affirmative action should be implemented in full to ensure that minority tribes in included in governing Kenya. Most of their land was alienated from them and they need adequate compensation.
• The Majimbo system of government be instituted to ensure regional balance and development.
• Constitutional Review. Adopt a people driven constitution that devolves power.

Source: North Rift Academic Forum, NORAF

Read more...

Will the Naivasha constitution deal short-change Rift Valley?

A closer look at the draft constitution crafted by the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) in Naivasha reveals a document that will forever impact Rift Valley Province in profound ways.

 

This was a document whose major tenets were spearheaded by a newfound friendship of strange bedfellows, one an angry and vengeful Agriculture Minister, William Ruto, and another, a calculating and ambitious Finance Minister, Uhuru Kenyatta, producing a 'compromise blueprint' that needs to be examined.

 

In the resulting deal, one side totally compromised on principles and aspirations held by their constituents, while elites from the other side got all they have long desired since the pre-independence period without breaking a sweat.

 

It is quite probable that most Rift Valley residents, disillusioned by recent events in government, have lost focus on examining the proposed draft constitution.

 

It's also possible that Ruto has capitalized on the rifts created by the handling of Mau, PEV and efforts against corruption, to claim role of sole defender of Rift Valley interests, as a political bargaining chip which he appears to be using for his own personal interest rather than his community's.

 

DEVOLUTION

ODM walked into this devolution debate quite divided and without joint purpose and the result is that the earlier proposed 2nd-tier of regional government will be no more. Rift Valley Province (as an administrative unit) or region (as a devolution unit) and it's sense of unity will be no more as soon as the draft passes.

 

The era of small and weak counties has arrived as there shall be no more Rift Valley region or province - as will be the case with all previously existing provinces, or regions proposed in either the Bomas draft or CoE draft.

 

With just a stroke, the Naivasha deal sliced and diced (in divide-and-rule fashion), the cosmopolitan province into many small, distinct and weak counties only reporting to the strong national government.

 

Nobody can question the long-held desire of Rift Valley residents to have a majimbo (quasi-federal) system which guarantees self-governance at local level with oversight of local resources including land and which is capable of providing checks and balances to the exercise of power at the national level.

 

Rift Valley’s forefathers in KADU including Jean Marie Seroney, Taita Toweet, and Daniel Moi, ensured this demand was entrenched in the Lancaster Constitution talks in London before independence.

 

However, after independence, President Jomo Kenyatta refused to allocate funds to the regional governments, and abolished them altogether in 1964, with disastrous consequences in the Rift Valley.

 

How did Kenyatta navigate and tame possible backlash from that unilateral assault on the constitution?

Kenyatta's handlers were calculating enough to lure Moi into a political pact. As Kenyatta dismantled the constitutionally created Jimbos, an interesting but significant political development - the formation of a new political alliance - was happening in the background.

 

Moi secretly negotiated a background deal with Kenyatta and essentially plotted an internal coup in KADU with express plans to form an alliance with KANU.

 

Moi's compromise card was facilitating the smooth dropping of the majimbo system, strongly favoured by his Rift Valley constituents, especially the Kipsigis and Nandi. In exchange, Moi was promised personal promotion up the political ladder.

 

Essentially it was an exchange of community aspirations for one individual's personal gain. A similar deal may be cooking today.

 

From the pact, Moi led a walkout from KADU into Kenyatta’s KANU, which signaled the end of the pro-majimbo party. The majimbo debate was slowly defeated and halted from then on.

 

That was the beginning of Rift Valley resources (especially land) being plundered at will from the center with people’s voices at the grassroots totally drowned out. Jean Marie Seroney’s fears were being confirmed.

 

It is this background that motivated Rift Valley residents to begin another protracted campaign to restore the principle of devolution back into the constitution.

 

In 2005, Rift Valley residents rejected the Wako draft constitution precisely because it was a blueprint perpetuating a continuation of the same post-independence ideology against devolution started by Kenyatta in 1963.

 

As early as independence, it was clear that Kenyatta's cronies of elites were strongly against a three-tier devolution with national, regional and county governments. Their position currently manifesting through views held by Central Province MPs, has not changed today.

 

Kenya has now been presented with another great opportunity to write a new constitution.

 

Rift Valley was recently represented at the Naivasha PSC negotiations by Agriculture Minister Hon. William Ruto and Chepalungu MP Hon. Isaac Ruto among others.

 

Representing the Central elites was Uhuru Kenyatta, Jeremiah Kioni and others, even tagging along Uhuru's cousin Beth Mugo as a very interested observer.

 

Let us look at what they came up with for devolution.

From the Committee of Experts (COE) revised draft constitution which contained a national government, 8 regional governments, and 47 county governments, the PSC started by first REMOVING THE 8 ‘JIMBOs’ (regional governments) as proposed by the PNU coalition of parties.

 

That was a swift act quite reminiscent of Jomo Kenyatta's 1964 action.

 

The elimination of the regional tier WILL DENY the small and weak counties an essential forum for co-ordination, and protection from undermining by the strong national government.

 

This means, without regions, and without administrative provinces, Rift Valley, either as a governance or administrative unit will be no more. There shall only be a national government and county governments (two tiers) entrenched in the constitution.

 

If you closely reflect what this means for instance at the South Rift, it means that majority of the Kipsigis will be sliced and diced into three counties, with some having their voices drowned out in Narok County, some dominated in Nakuru County, and the remaining having their say in Kericho district. The divide-and-rule dictum becomes apparent. The removal of a sense of communal unity becomes real.

 

On top of that, these county governments like Kericho will be weak and exposed to undermining by the national government at Nairobi because there will be no regional government to shield them.

 

The Ruto-Kenyatta driven PSC also retained in their proposed draft, administrators like DCs, Dos and Chiefs who will still ensure that the national government remains effectively in charge of local governance within the already weak counties. Thus locals will have undermined say over local governance and resources.

 

If William Ruto wants to soon face his constituents with this arrangement he helped Kenyatta's PSC allies chart, selling it as devolution, that would be the biggest fairy tale ever told.

 

Essentially, by removing the regional tier, which protects county governments, and retaining administrators, meaningful devolution has been killed yet again.

 

Any curious and keen observer will note that these ‘devolution’ proposals are essentially the same ones forwarded by the Wako draft constitution that were rejected in 2005.

 

In killing real devolution, the PSC also did something significant. The all-important independent Commission on Revenue Allocation with the mandate of determining the basis of sharing revenue from national resources was struck out, and its role retained by Treasury in Nairobi.

 

That was the clearest statement from the PSC that there were basically no real defenders for devolution in that Naivasha get-together.

 

Treasury is part of the National government and it is not expected to fairly and justly divide resources between the various levels of government. Thus instead of a national resource allocating mechanism, the powerful President, and whoever he/she appoints Finance Minister, will retain the powers to distribute resources to counties. In any way you want to look at it, this does not pass for change.

This is definitely not what Rift Valley has been clamoring for and it would be unbelievable to any lay Rift Valley resident that Senior Rift Valley leaders were sitting in these PSC deliberations that came up with these proposals.

 

That is until folks remember the history of Moi, Kenyatta and Majimbo.

 

History has repeated itself and Rift Valley peoples' aspirations have been thrown out the window in exchange for personal promises for a single individual.

 

RESOURCE ALLOCATIONS

Now that we have seen that the resource allocation mechanism has been retained at the Treasury, let’s see the formula the PSC suggested for disbursing resources from Treasury – just as a guideline.

 

Basically, PSC has allowed political patronage to be the basis for future resource allocations. Treasury has historically used political patronage to allocate resources inequitably, so this has been retained. Future wielders of Presidential power will wield the power over resource allocation.

 

In the draft, the PSC suggested that the 47 county governments receive only 15 per cent of the revenue collected by the national government, based on the last audited public accounts approved by Parliament.

 

That means, if this draft constitution comes into effect in 2013, the available audited accounts may be those of 2009/10, on the basis of which the 47 counties will receive a paltry Sh85 billion out of a potential expenditure of Sh1,000 billion.

 

Now divide Sh 85 billion by 47 counties and each government, for instance the populous one in Kericho, gets only Sh 1.8 billion per year. As the cash is sent to county governments, the strong national government will simultaneously relieve itself many development obligations and payment of salaries of public servants in the county. That is where the cunning PSC team hopes to hoodwink masses.

 

In typical PNU cunningness, PSC capped the resource allocation to counties in the Constitution to the figure 15% irrespective of any mitigating circumstances.

 

This is yet another clever ploy by PNU to put a CONSTITUTIONAL CAP, shielding taxpayer money inside the Treasury, with very little going to the periphery.

 

Again in PNU style, to hoodwink poor regions (during the referendum) that their areas are being given consideration, the crafty PSC drafters proposed that marginalised regions will receive a grant of 0.5 per cent of the revenues, which amounts to a paltry Sh2.8 billion, to cover infrastructure projects in ‘health, water, roads, electricity and other necessary services’.

 

This was loftily said to be motivated by the desire to ostensibly ‘bring them to as nearly equal a state to the rest of the country as possible’.

 

Now, let's be serious, how will this tiny amount of money spread over a third of the counties (16 counties, several in the Rift Valley) reverse a legacy of deprivation and neglect?

 

Splitting Sh 2.8 billion between 16 counties in arid and semi-arid regions means each county gets just an extra Sh 175 million per year.

 

The PSC knows these are just gimmicks.

 

SENATE

The PSC also went ahead, as driven by the PNU Coalition, to devour the Senate, which is supposed to be a legislative body that protects regions against marginalization.

 

After killing the regions, the so-called senate was deliberately incapacitated and rendered toothless, by the PSC, and is now akin to the forum for authorities in the infamous Kilifi Draft whose proposals were completely rejected in 2005. Are the people of Rift valley aware of this?

EXECUTIVE

To illustrate how divided Rift Valley’s voice was while entering this debate, it is noteworthy that Chepalungu MP, Isaac Ruto, favored a parliamentary system while Agriculture MP,William Ruto, proposed a pure presidential system.

Someone must have been bidding on behalf of external forces and sure, the pure presidential system carried the day.

 

But how is the pure presidential system likely to impact Rift Valley residents in case Rift Valley doesn’t produce a President for a long time?

 

If a parliamentary system was adopted, as Isaac Ruto suggested, Rift Valley MPs would definitely have a formidable voice of representation and parliamentary voting bloc that would guarantee safeguards against marginalization, unfair resource allocations and under-development.

 

However, under the pure presidential system proposed by William Ruto, Rift Valley will have to depend on the whims and mercy of that powerful President. Nobody can guarantee who the President is going to be in 2012, 2017, 2023 etc.

 

In our country bedevilled by corruption, ethnicity, political patronage and impunity, the proposed pure presidential system offers a perfect platform for the elected President to morph into another imperial ruler favouring select regions.

 

This leaves Rift Valley and all other regions in a precarious situation, simply depending on goodwill and hopes that a 'favourable' Presidency comes by. Unfortunately, that possibility cannot be guaranteed at all times.

 

Ever Province in Kenya has tasted what a hostile Presidency can be like, when political expediency overrides parliamentary decisions, with the executive invariably disregarding recommendations, resolutions and/or directives of the House, with little or no sanction.

REPRESENTATION IN PARLIAMENT

Despite false arguments being forwarded by PNU MPs, the truth of the matter is that Central Kenya did benefit from adequate representation over the years since independence, compared to other regions. The appalling inequality between Central and Rift Valley is testimony enough.

 

Poverty index is higher in Rift Valley (more than 55%) and lowest in Central (at only 31 per cent). We cannot marginalise parts of our country including Rift Valley (parts of which are arid) and then go ahead to claim that they do not deserve more representation.

 

During the Naivasha constitution debate, Central Province MPs in the PSC led by Uhuru Kenyatta and Jeremiah Kioni, insisted on redrawing constituencies in the constitution because they claim areas occupied by GEMA, are under-represented in the House.

 

They falsely claim that Rift Valley and North Eastern provinces are “over-represented” because of former President Moi’s influence.

 

With sure help from William Ruto, Ababu Namwamba and Isaac Ruto in the PSC, the Central MPs (ignoring the professional job being done by the Independent Boundaries Commission) have thus "fixed" this "anomaly" by creating a relatively sizeable number of new constituencies in Central, Nairobi, Upper Eastern, and parts of Rift Valley occupied by GEMA.

 

Of the 80 new constituencies created, all regions benefited from a few more extra seats, but the GEMA region is slated to get the lion’s share of extra seats, cunningly distributed across four regions (Nairobi, Central, Upper Eastern and parts of Rift Valley they occupy).

 

For certain, their relative parliamentary strength will only be felt in future if the draft remains as proposed. A lot of CDF funds will also be directly heading onto these new GEMA constituencies thus allocating direct resources to their people.

 

It is baffling that Rift Valley MPs did not question the fallacious argument about Central Kenya being ‘under-represented’.

 

Based on 2005 population projections by ECK, and the recently concluded Census, Central’s population has in fact been shrinking.

 

Indeed, Central Kenya has relatively lower average population per constituency/ MP at 139,000 than all the other provinces except North Eastern.

 

For every one constituency in Central, there is an average of 139,000 people, while in Rift Valley, for every constituency, there is an average of 171,000 people. Which province is therefore under-represented in reality?

 

Another important thing that affects representation in Rift Valley is geographic size of constituencies. When we look at the average geographical size of constituencies, Central’s is only 456 square kilometres, compared 3,700 sq. km for Rift Valley.

 

Thus an MP in Central Kenya travels only 456 square kilometres (in good roads) to meet 139,000 constituents while his counterpart in Rift Valley covers 3,700 (of rough terrain) to meet 171,000 constituents. Based on this size alone, the constituency in Rift Valley deserves to be split.

 

Indeed, people in Rift Valley had a chance in Naivasha, to demand a ceiling on the geographical size of their constituencies but they simply did not.

 

William Ruto, Isaac Ruto and other Rift Valley MPs should explain what they were doing at the PSC resulting in this blatant disenfranchisement and further marginalization of their own people.

 

Has William Ruto ever considered this - Moi was guaranteed and rewarded his promotion by Kenyatta when he stiffled Rift Valley's constitutional aspirations like Majimbo precisely because he had no prior brush with Kenyatta's community. Compared to Moi in 1960s, is Ruto standing in a similar position today?

 

Read more...

Wintersports - Kenya makes a mark

Three Kenyans are training for the next winter sports as ski marathoners! Patrick Sang, Titus Rotich and Daniel Bii are currently training at the Oberhof Ski Resort in the forest of Thuringia, eastern Germany.

(Photo left: Phillip Boit at the Nagano winter games 1988)

Read more...

Kenya governed by homeguards and colonial collobarators?

By John Cheruiyot

The K24 Capital Talk hosted by renown journalist Jeff Koinange recently interviewed Gitu Wa Kahengeri the Mau Mau Veteran’s Association spokesman. Kahengeri made profound and candid observation about Kenya’s political landscape since 1963.

He categorically stated that home guards and colonial collaborators took over the reins of the nation in 1963.He further observed that Kenyatta was the only freedom fighter who shockingly surrounded himself with the enemies of the liberation and thus Jomo Kenyatta betrayed the cause of Mau Mau movement and the whole agenda of economic and political struggle.

Indeed Kahengeri merely stated the obvious. Post colonial Kenya has been an affair of traitors and betrayers across the board. It is only record that in 1964 Lord Delamere deeded a half of his estate in Rift Valley to Jomo Kenyatta. The move marked the genesis of national betrayal of colossal scale. The liberators turned oppressors; champions of the poor became the icons and symbols of neocolonialism. The black elite became the became the puppets of the British Empire and agents of massive exploitation of national resources to favor the local elite and their masters in London.

It is common knowledge that British Empire was repackaged after World War II.It became the Common Wealth under the Queen of England to this day. The sons of colonial chiefs began to call shots after 1963 to date. The colonial administration was perpetuated in civil service, provincial administration, in judiciary, the executive and in the legislature. Colonial policies and programs were instensified.The country became a property of a few moneyed and powerful individuals.

Kenyatta and Moi administrations used the institutions and systems invented by the colonialists to its fullest. They created the mafias driven by impunity, greed and gluttony of the highest order.

Millions of acres today are in the hands of few individuals-individuals from all the 42 tribes of Kenya. Those who were lucky to be army majors and generals, district and provincial administrators, permanent secretaries, parastatal chiefs, cabinet ministers and MPs among others became a new a breed of middle and upper classes. They became millionaires and billionaires as those who fought for Uhuru languished in abject poverty. Landlessness for millions became the order of the day as a minority enjoyed-shopped in Paris, ate Europeans and American bacons, drunk their water, banked in their banks, dined and wined in their hotels in Nairobi, London and New York.They sent their children to royal colleges in UK and first class universities in America. They in real sense became black colonialists and oppressors.

Any leader who tilted towards the liberation of the people was assassinated, died mysteriously or detained or punctured politically.

This is the Kenya we have today. They elite formed what Julius Kabarega Nyerere coined ‘The Man Eat Man Society’.

The elite in parliament today are the products of the Man-Eat-Man-Society.

The Mungiki as Kahengeri put it are the grand children of freedom fights whose grand parents suffered a double tragedy: they lost their ancestral land in Central to the Home Guards and today landless while their architects of colonial era enjoy in large scale estate in both Central and Rift Valley.

The ruling elite in Kenya today whether from tribe A or B or C or D are not bothered at al to empower their tribes. They use their tribes as political currency to buy power and authority at the national level.

The British Empire from 1920 to 1963 succeeded in creating her agents, instituions and systems which have outlasted it.

The British Empire was against devolution of power. It was against the Africans getting liberated intellectually, economically and politically. Currently the ruling class is equally against the devolved governments at regional and county levels. The elite will not allow the emergence of vibrant institutions which will eventually render them irrelevant.

It will be a miracle if Kenyans will actually get constitutions of people at the grassroots.

With 20,000 primary schools, 6000 high schools of which only 18 are national and 7 public universities national inequality will remain for ages to come unless something extra ordinary happens.

Currently the ruling elite are privatizing key resources and transferring them to foreign concerns further underscores the massive neocolonial control of the nation. The rise of multinational corporations and the international NGOs is a pointer that Kenya is sooner than later be a property of Western and Asian masers.

Gitu Wa Kahengeri and other freedom fighters will continue to watch as their grand and great grand children are rendered homeless, landless, and jobless and thus become the scum of the nation.

The struggle today is messy in Kenya because the majority does not realize that their elite are agents of oppression thus are absolute mercenaries.

The elite are obsessed by power and money. They are like the West African chiefs who sold their people for guns, glassware, wine and European luxuries.

The rise of Mungiki and violent youth throughout the country is a pointer that the future is bleak for Kenya unless drastic measures are done now. Police and the army will not contain an army of millions of discontented youth. The owners of chunks of land whether they are army generals or presidents they will one day face the tsunami of peoples’ frustrations.

The Committee of Experts should do to this nation what the fathers of America did to their nation in 1776.They gave America an eternal constitution which institutialized the Government of the People for the People and By the People.

The Post Election Violence should be dealt through a dispensation of democracy rather than of police state and establishment of countless police states. Rift Valley, Coast and North Eastern requires institutions of democracy and good governance not security presence.

The way forward for Kenya is for current elite to realize that the further is bleak if institutionalized oppression is left intact.

Jesus Christ observed ‘What does it benefit a man to gain the whole world and lose his soul’.

Christ’s warning is today a reality to grabbers and thieves of national and global resources. Billionaires and tyrants are not among the happiest people on earth. Many have divorced sexy and beautiful partners; many have committed suicide and proven the fact chasing after power and riches through sinful ways leads to one destination-death and misery.

Kenyans should strive to create a nation where every talent, every resource and every brain is used for the common good of all. That is the way forward. We need men and women who are driven by love to serve their countrymen and joy of giving their very best for the good of the nation. Such breed of leaders who can get them and where are they now?

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

 

Read more...

Mau evicitions: A case of bungled and disorganised government

Read more...

The Faint Voice in Academia:An Analysis of the Psychology of Nandi Proverbs and its place in Critical Psychology

Rose Ruto-Korir

I will present this paper within my own lens of perceiving Critical Psychology as a subject that revolves around the definition and systems of the mainstream Schools of Psychology. A mention of Psychology brings to the mind of the non-professional, an expert ability of one to read the mind, while academics quickly think about the numerous theories, all advanced in the West, as forming the benchmarks of the definition. Fox (2000) concurs that there are still unresolved issues of definition of what exactly constitutes or defines critical psychology and emphasizes focus areas that critical psychologists ought to bring into the field.

Read more...

Is Raila losing grip of Rift Valley?

By Biketi Kikechi and Alex Ndegwa

Prime Minister Raila Odinga’s pursuit of clearance of human settlements from Mau Forest and subsequent exchange with Rift Valley leaders Is reshaping the political landscape ahead of 2012 General Election.

Read more...

KENYA A PARIAH-FAILED STATE

DR. KIPRONOH RUTTOH

I am bemused and I am watching the great circus, taking place in Kenya. If only there were leaders, Kenya would not have been in this shame full episodes! when we should have been holding our heads high and proudly proclaiming ourselves as great people and one nation, we are, but placed in a situation-rather a nightmare, that has left us recoil in shame.

Read more...

Mau Forest politics: a detailed explanation

Here is an insightful article on the Mau Forest plight:

It is estimated that there are 25,000 people who either legally or illegally have settled in both Mau East and Mau West forests. The Government plans to resettle them elsewhere and fence off the water tower, one of the five in the country. The Kipsigis community, the main occupants of the water-catchment area, oppose the eviction, saying they settled in the forest legally. Elders say their community is being punished by the coalition Government following their stand in the 2007 General Election. The elders have warned the Government over the evictions, saying the move was causing panic among residents, some of whom were threatening to disrupt peace.

Read more...