Imanyara Bill puts Mt Kenya leaders in a dilemma

By Gakuu Mathenge

Imenti Central MP Gitobu Imanyara’s push for the establishment of a special tribunal to try suspected instigators of post-election violence has put central Kenya political leaders at a crossroads.

Observers also see the Imanyara Bill as a political booby trap for PNU leading lights, Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka.

Since post-election skirmishes, Central Province leaders have been on the forefront demanding for justice for victims. As Deputy Prime Minister, Finance Minister, Kanu chairman and former presidential candidate, Uhuru is first in line in Central Kenya political leadership.

But for the first time, Uhuru and the entire PNU leadership find themselves on the opposite sides with the Church over the question of justice for victims of post-election violence, majority of whom were from the Kikuyu community.

Uhuru and Kalonzo support the Cabinet decision of July 30 to forego a judicial tribunal and follow the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC) path.

‘Greatest betrayal’

However, the Episcopal Conference of Kenya and the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK) have issued statements calling for a judicial tribunal to try suspects behind the violence.

A statement signed by 24 Catholic Bishops and read by the head of Catholic Church in Kenya John Cardinal Njue said: "We wish to remind all Kenyans that the Government agreed upon a special tribunal to be set as a court that was to sit within the territorial boundaries of Kenya and seek accountability against persons bearing the greatest responsibility for crimes."

NCCK termed the Cabinet decision "the greatest betrayal of citizens by Government."

NCCK Secretary General Reverend Canon Peter Karanja said: "We should consider that they (Cabinet) do not intend to try the suspects of the post-election violence and I think there is need to pressurise the International Criminal Court to commence investigations as the surest way of nailing down culprits."

Uhuru and Kalonzo are widely expected to be first on the line in Kibaki succession exigencies, and many will be watching how they behave when the Bill is tabled before Parliament. However, the duo will be hard put to wiggle out of perception of callously trading justice for post-election violence victims for 2012 General Election votes.

The Kalenjin and Kikuyu communities were the main protagonists, and Uhuru’s dalliance with Kalenjin leadership has assumed a clear campaign mode.

Kalonzo is in a bigger dilemma. He hopes central Kenya will endorse him as their flag bearer in the Kibaki succession, but he too will have to deal with hard questions from those who expect him to play witness to truth, and the faith he professes.

On July 30, the Cabinet announced it would not be forming a special tribunal, and had instead opted for the TJRC. The reasoning for failure to table a Bill prepared by Justice Minister Mutula Kilonzo was that Parliament would not vote for it. However, some felt President Kibaki and PM Raila Odinga did not lobby their troops hard enough.

Uhuru and Kalonzo, have the greatest hold on the PNU side of the Coalition, but are not expected to support Imanyara’s Bill.

Moral cause

It’s not difficult to see why: Uhuru may not want to antagonise his newfound relationship with some Kalenjin leaders. Kalonzo may not to antagonise Uhuru.

However, they may gain the elusive Kalenjin votes, but lose the moral cause. Raila announced last weekend he supported the Bill and its objectives of fighting impunity. "I am happy Gitobu has seen the light," he said in Meru

"I am yet to see it. But I know MPs cannot be blackmailed to support something they do not understand. I have not been approached to support it," PNU Chief Whip George Thuo said.

PNU Secretary General Kiraitu Murungi was, however, non-committal.

The Bill seeks to amend the Constitution to allow for creation of a special tribunal to prosecute those responsible for planning, funding and executing last year’s post-election violence.

A consortium of civil society groups said the Cabinet move was fraudulent and reckless. In an open letter to Kibaki and Raila, the consortium wrote: "The Cabinet decision to forego a judicial process undermines the law and encourages some to always resort to institutionalised violence as an acceptable practice. The Cabinet, collectively and individually, appears to sabotage the realisation of the objects of the National Accord."

 

 

Read all about: post-election violence Imanyara Bill puts Mt Kenya leaders in a dilemma By Gakuu Mathenge Imenti Central MP Gitobu Imanyara’s push for the establishment of a special tribunal to try suspected instigators of post-election violence has put central Kenya political leaders at a crossroads. Observers also see the Imanyara Bill as a political booby trap for PNU leading lights, Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta and Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka. Since post-election skirmishes, Central Province leaders have been on the forefront demanding for justice for victims. As Deputy Prime Minister, Finance Minister, Kanu chairman and former presidential candidate, Uhuru is first in line in Central Kenya political leadership. But for the first time, Uhuru and the entire PNU leadership find themselves on the opposite sides with the Church over the question of justice for victims of post-election violence, majority of whom were from the Kikuyu community. Uhuru and Kalonzo support the Cabinet decision of July 30 to forego a judicial tribunal and follow the Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission (TJRC) path. ‘Greatest betrayal’ However, the Episcopal Conference of Kenya and the National Council of Churches of Kenya (NCCK) have issued statements calling for a judicial tribunal to try suspects behind the violence. A statement signed by 24 Catholic Bishops and read by the head of Catholic Church in Kenya John Cardinal Njue said: “We wish to remind all Kenyans that the Government agreed upon a special tribunal to be set as a court that was to sit within the territorial boundaries of Kenya and seek accountability against persons bearing the greatest responsibility for crimes.” NCCK termed the Cabinet decision “the greatest betrayal of citizens by Government.” NCCK Secretary General Reverend Canon Peter Karanja said: “We should consider that they (Cabinet) do not intend to try the suspects of the post-election violence and I think there is need to pressurise the International Criminal Court to commence investigations as the surest way of nailing down culprits.” Uhuru and Kalonzo are widely expected to be first on the line in Kibaki succession exigencies, and many will be watching how they behave when the Bill is tabled before Parliament. However, the duo will be hard put to wiggle out of perception of callously trading justice for post-election violence victims for 2012 General Election votes. The Kalenjin and Kikuyu communities were the main protagonists, and Uhuru’s dalliance with Kalenjin leadership has assumed a clear campaign mode. Kalonzo is in a bigger dilemma. He hopes central Kenya will endorse him as their flag bearer in the Kibaki succession, but he too will have to deal with hard questions from those who expect him to play witness to truth, and the faith he professes. On July 30, the Cabinet announced it would not be forming a special tribunal, and had instead opted for the TJRC. The reasoning for failure to table a Bill prepared by Justice Minister Mutula Kilonzo was that Parliament would not vote for it. However, some felt President Kibaki and PM Raila Odinga did not lobby their troops hard enough. Uhuru and Kalonzo, have the greatest hold on the PNU side of the Coalition, but are not expected to support Imanyara’s Bill. Moral cause It’s not difficult to see why: Uhuru may not want to antagonise his newfound relationship with some Kalenjin leaders. Kalonzo may not to antagonise Uhuru. However, they may gain the elusive Kalenjin votes, but lose the moral cause. Raila announced last weekend he supported the Bill and its objectives of fighting impunity. “I am happy Gitobu has seen the light,” he said in Meru “I am yet to see it. But I know MPs cannot be blackmailed to support something they do not understand. I have not been approached to support it,” PNU Chief Whip George Thuo said. PNU Secretary General Kiraitu Murungi was, however, non-committal. The Bill seeks to amend the Constitution to allow for creation of a special tribunal to prosecute those responsible for planning, funding and executing last year’s post-election violence. A consortium of civil society groups said the Cabinet move was fraudulent and reckless. In an open letter to Kibaki and Raila, the consortium wrote: “The Cabinet decision to forego a judicial process undermines the law and encourages some to always resort to institutionalised violence as an acceptable practice. The Cabinet, collectively and individually, appears to sabotage the realisation of the objects of the National Accord.”

 

 

---