The Punguza Mizigo initiative advanced by the Thirdway Alliance has triggered heated debate about constitutional change. Opinion is sharply divided on the process, but there is growing consensus among the political elite about a referendum to change the laws. But that is why we raise questions. What is the justification for constitutional change? Are the issues in contention a creation of the political class or are they matters that are germane to the citizens?
It is paramount to interrogate the principle to avoid being railroaded into a process that is not clearly defined and which is essentially designed to actualise the interest of politicians. Already, there is division among the political coalitions over it.
Jubilee and Nasa top heavyweights have poured cold water on the proposal by Thirdway, which is led by Dr Ekuru Aukot, and the unstated message is that since he is a political ‘minion’, and who miraculously manoeuvred past the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, he cannot be allowed to prosecute his case to its logical end.
Yet Nasa leader Raila Odinga and his camp are pushing for a referendum through the Building Bridges Initiative, which he co-authored with President Kenyatta. That is a perfect illustration of ambition and power play. Referenda are a test-run for political supremacy, as happened in 2005 and 2010. The bigwigs cannot stand a peripheral candidate stealing the show and defining national politics, which is what referenda are all about.
We have to address the fundamental issues. Principally, the 2010 Constitution is a solid document that should not be subjected to whimsical obliteration through fanciful propositions by political actors. At its promulgation, it was applauded as trail-blazing, particularly given its Bill of Rights with far-reaching civil liberties. Its centrepiece is devolution of power across levels of government and institutions and fortifying the sovereignty of the citizens.
The challenge, however, is that the Constitution has not been implemented to the full. Several provisions remain in limbo for lack of enabling legislation arising from political contestations and lethargy by the Establishment to push them through. One of the outstanding matters is enactment of a law to give force to the two-thirds gender rule, which is hampered by political intrigues and societal mindsets that militate against gender equity.
The issues being canvassed for the plebiscite are not convincing. It is not in the interest of the citizens to be pushed through a referendum that has no clear philosophy and whose outcome would only serve to venerate politicians.
Credit: Source link