Today, Public Watchdog’s delves on Miguna Miguna’s revelations in his book Peeling Back the Mask released last week, not on the merits or otherwise of the issues raised, but on the wider public interest matters.

M2 would be an appropriate characterisation of Miguna Miguna Why? Because of his demonstrable of records of detailed events and happenings inside and outside his former boss’s court of power and the workings of the Grand Coalition Government.

Theatrics

How?  In what can also be characterised as the workings inside the Prime Minister’s Court, M2, who served as Raila’s legal advisor on constitutional and coalition matters made revelations that are both shocking and unsettling as to the demeanour and theatrics of the author himself.

M2, the person, has been put at the centre stage, not largely for what has been revealed, but for his personal demeanour and claims that he has yet more damaging revelations, including roles and plans on the unfinished business of post-election violence?

 Yes, M2 claims: “I have critical information stored both inside me and outside that if I want can take all these leaders to The Hague.” What then, are the lessons?

First, M2 has once again demonstrated that — with the benefit of hindsight and our record of history — when those you trust turn against you, then you have nowhere to hide as they have an insider’s knowledge of your good and bad times, weaknesses and strengths. As the wisdom of time has proven, when in private do only what you would not worry you if it is revealed, but verify others’ sincerity.

Authenticity

This must now be the biggest lesson for our leaders across the political divide and close associates. We are not in any way vouching for the authenticity of what is contained in the book, or in any of the alleged happenings inside or outside the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) or the PM’s powerhouse.

One thing is, however, obvious: M2 was at the centre of ODM’s defence infrastructure and counter strategies against the Party of National Unity (PNU). But was he part of the solution or the problem? Is he a political hireling, as is now alleged, and if so whose? Or does it matter anyway?

Secondly, our leaders must be aware they hold positions of great public trust and can enjoy the trust and confidence of the people only as long their actions, inactions and that of their close associates and relatives in proximity of positions of authority continue to engender public confidence. 

But do they? Not as much as they would like us, the people, to believe and often most of them abuse the very authority vested in them behind walls and curtains with sustained impunity in what can be characterised as “everybody does it, so we must also partake” or is it? In this respect, we must insist that transparency and accountability must be without exceptions.

Deal with it

Thus we must now redirect energy on investigating alleged serious abuses alleged by M2 as counter-defence strategy and the spotlight must remained focused on whether he himself abetted any crime by withholding information that would have served wider public interest.

The Prime Minister (PM) must now deal with the challenge without wishing it away, in order to demonstrate, even if politics are at play, he has nothing to do with any abuse of authority by anyone close to him by virtue of employment   or other relationships.

political liability

The PM is best advised to proactively deal with the matter with speed, so that in the end, the public can assign or reassign any political liability to where it belongs.

Thirdly, for M2 and other advisors in general, they must always remember that their role is only to render advice and the enormity of making the decision and electing out of available choices remains the responsibility of the leaders, who may choose to do nothing (that also constituting a decision).

Blaming the boss

Which begs the question: Did M2 mistakenly sees his position as that of a decision maker acting on behalf of PM or being a potentially the third Principal? How can he blame his boss for settling a dispute in formation of government when the country was on the brink of collapse and degenerating into civil war?

Is it possible that just because of his emerging demeanour, M2 contributed to the Coalition totally unaware of the mood of the hour as seen by his boss?

The land question is matter of a delicate unfinished business, but it is not as easy as expecting Lands minister James Orengo, notwithstanding his alleged Sh500,000 suit, to confiscate a tea estate and factory simply because it was owned by a former President.

In the end, the real power of governance and considerations are much more than it appears outside Government and power corrupts absolutely.

Finally, M2 must now be seen as a very valuable witness with critical information that could serve public interest.

 As such must be accorded appropriate protection, this being a matter of a compelling the public interest.

The writer is an opinion leader who prefers to remain anonymous

Comments to: publicwatchdog@standardmedia.co.ke