By Oscar Obonyo

NAIROBI, KENYA: The Truth, Justice and Reconciliation Commission wants President Uhuru Kenyatta to say sorry – at least 11 times – for ill deeds including massacre, political assassinations, extra-judicial killings, sexual and other violence meted against women, children and the minorities.

And the commission has deadlines of between three months and 12 months within which the President should have publicly acknowledged and apologised to Kenyans for the said ill deeds. These are just some of the recommendations of the Bethuel Kiplagat-led Commission, which are already subject of heated debate. 

Is apology by the President enough to comfort and heal wounds of the aggressed? Alternatively is the Commission admitting the cases at hand are a maze to the extent it cannot advise on a more progressing way forward? Or is this merely a public relations gimmick, same as those witnessed during the unveiling of commission and probe reports – most of which have been condemned to dusty shelves?       

President Uhuru may well offer his apologies at one go – probably even on Jamhuri Day, a couple of days away. But does this answer to the three main tenets of the commission – truth, justice and reconciliation – as captured in Kiplagat team’s acronym?

To begin with, most people have problems with the first tenet – “truth”. Barely 24 hours after the report was unveiled, a host of individuals named including politicians, former Vice-President Kalonzo Musyoka, Rt Major General Joseph Nkaissery, Joshua Kuttuny, Norman Nyagah have protested at not being accorded a chance to state their side of the story.

Fell flat

Besides raising questions on the truth, it also touches on the second aspect of “justice” on the part of the alleged aggressors. But even more baffling is the confession from none other than Kiplagat himself that accusations leveled against him will fell flat if he is accorded a hearing chance.

If the TJRC Chairman, who was a member of the probing and drafting team failed to get an opportunity to clear his name, who else possibly did?

“Chances are that we have a one-sided report, in other words some of those named in the report may not have been given an opportunity to rebut. So what we have may just be a document put together by TJRC mere stating, ‘this is what the people told us’,” reacts Prof Macharia Munene, who teaches History and International Relations at United States International University (USIU).  

However, a TJRC Commissioner, who did not wish to be identified, maintained that all those named in the report were given a chance to give their side of the story, including the Chairman of TJRC.

 Noting that the Commission has recorded reactions from some of the alleged aggressors, who came before it, the Commissioner explains that the cases at hand are not new as some were probed decades ago and that suspects have been accorded countless opportunity to defend themselves.

“Truth is bitter, if not painful my dear friend. Some of those mentioned are not only in denial but have issued direct threats to us and that is why you have to conceal my identity,” says the official. Besides asking the President to apologise on behalf of the Executive and his predecessors, Jomo Kenyatta, Daniel arap Moi and Mwai Kibaki, under whose watch some of the atrocities were committed, TJRC also recommends negotiation for compensation from the British Government for violations under the colonial period. The TJRC Commissioner defends the move requiring President Kenyatta to apologise: “Contrary to opinion elsewhere that we have heaped pastr errors on the Jubilee Government and President Kenyatta, in particular, the apology is not admission of personal culpability. We have borrowed this trend from some of the world’s best practices,” he explains.

The official cites the example of the Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who recently apologised to the Aborigines of past injustices meted on them, as well as her Canadian counterpart, Stephen Harper who extended a similar sorry message to the native Red Indians. 

The Kiplagat team also calls for establishment of a public memorial for some community heroes as well as the release of all reports and materials of all previous investigations of political assassinations. The team also roots for negotiation for compensation of  survivors of sexual violence committed by British soldiers, particularly in Laikipia and Samburu.

Colonial period

With regard to violations under the colonial period, TJRC reports wants the British Premier to apologise, over and above compensating the victims: “In all these massacres, the colonial state was present and was always unapologetic. Indeed, the colonial state always tried to minimise, cover up or flatly deny the occurrence of such mass killings.” Some of the recommendations, however, are curiously a copy-and-paste job of previous reports including, Akiwumi on tribal clashes, Ndung’u on land, Kenya National Human Rights Commission and the Waki reports on 2007 post-election violence, as well as assassination probe reports on former Nyanduarua MP JJ Kariuki, former Foreign Affairs minister Robert Ouko and former Justice minister Tom Mboya.

Our source at TJRC, however maintains that part of the teams mandate was to sift through the works of past commissions of inquiry and come up with a concrete report that will recommend justice and closure of past atrocities. It has not been rosy, though, for the TJRC team that witnessed internal squabbles from the word go. First to leave was Vice Chair, Betty Murungi, over the leadership of Kiplagat, who was accused of having worked closely with past regimes that were largely associated with past human rights violations.

Besides Kiplagat, Prof Munene also faults the composition of other members of the Commission. The historian wonders how such a crucial Commission with a massive mandate of looking back at Kenya’s historical moments, failed to include a single historian. He maintains that the team missed out on a host of historical facts including mixing up details on dates and eras. Although Kiplagat momentarily left the Commission, the squabbles did not end and his forceful return was equally under dispute. Little wonder, the Chairman has been the first to hurl barbs at the report of his own team by expressing fears that it’s recommendations might be rejected.

Coming from the Chairman of the said probe committee, these sentiments cannot be wished away. What is more is that the country’s CEO, who has been handed the report and who is expected to spearhead its execution, is mentioned alongside his deputy is the same document for alleged roles in the 2007 post-election violence.

However our source at TJRC reassures there is nothing fear: “Just like the Constitution which we enacted in 2010, this document has a self-propelling mechanism. Nobody can kill it. And if you dumped it on the shelves, it will find a way of walking out, if any citizen goes to court to sue over lack of its implementation.”