Allow leaders to work, then hold them accountable

The last week has been one of heightened political temperatures. From the move by MPs to sign a petition for impeachment of Devolution Cabinet Secretary Anne Waiguru to the disappearance and subsequent resurfacing of Embu Speaker Kariuki Mate, it has been a fairly emotive week.

But calls for Waiguru’s impeachment drive appears to be waning. With a growing chorus of influential voices dismissing these calls — the latest coming from Deputy President William Ruto — the initiative by Igembe South MP Mithika Linturi to remove Ms Waiguru from office seems to have lost much of its sting despite Linturi’s claim that he has marshalled more than 100 signatures to begin the impeachment process.

It will not be surprising if Linturi and company begin to realise that their initiative was ill-advised — their claim that the Cabinet Secretary irregularly transferred National Youth Service Director Kiplimo Ruto was unfounded as were claims that Gor Semelang’o was illegally removed as chairman of the Board of the Youth Enterprise Development Fund. However, Waiguru is not out of the woods yet because Linturi has not climbed down from his stated intentions. We stand for due process and the rule of law in the execution of public service. We will continue to hold public servants of whatever rank to the highest standards of the law and public order. But there are several fundamental flaws in the calls to impeach Waiguru, looking at the constitutional guidelines for the process. Firstly, framers of the Constitution place a very high threshold for a Cabinet Secretary to be removed from office.

Casual removal of office bearers would amount to subversion of democracy. Regrettably, the current wave of impeachments and votes of no confidence are triggered by minor administrative misdemeanours.

It must be stated that although the Constitution envisages that Cabinet Secretaries must be non-politicians so that they can function without divided loyalty and distractions, these technocrats must realise that they are operating in a political environment where their actions have political ramifications.  Therefore, they must balance their mandate to achieve stated benchmarks with due sensitivity to social expectations and public perceptions. For instance, the issue of regional balance is a sensitive one, which must be weighed against the stated objective to respect meritocracy.

Authorities have often been criticised for ignoring the statutory requirement that forbids members of one ethnic community from constituting more than 30 per cent of those working in one institution. Therefore, even though the appointing authorities may cite meritocracy as the yardstick for employment — sometimes a very subjective yardstick — they must be sensitive to social expectations. And as newcomers in the political chessboard, it is these sensitivities that Cabinet Secretaries may appear to lack.

Although Cabinet Secretaries are not career politicians themselves — except for the exceptional few — they are serving at the pleasure of their appointing authority who is a politician serving different and diverse constituencies.

Their sensitivity to these dynamics is, therefore, critical.

However, the flurry of impeachments must be viewed with foreboding. Not only do these actions amplify the preoccupation of our politicians with petty politicking, they also raise serious ethical questions about the motives behind some of these petitions for impeachment. Governors have complained that ward representatives often demand favours to stave off impeachments. This is not only criminal — it also subverts the democratic process that gives voters mandate to choose their leaders at the ballot box. This inviolable right should not be abused or subverted by anyone, except under exceptional and extreme circumstances.

Even as Senators prepare to debate a Bill that will guide the impeachment process, sanctions must be considered against those who introduce political mischief. They must be firmly dissuaded from introducing mischievous and frivolous interventions to the governance process; whether they are court cases or other forms of political grandstanding that take attention away from nation building. Let us embrace consensus building and shun petty politicking because there are far too many challenges that need our attention.