What is in it for wananchi in this political show?

This day might go down as one of the more important ones in Kenya’s political history. The main Opposition party, ODM, is celebrating ten years of existence. While affiliate parties of the Jubilee Alliance, having dissolved, are joining forces in the new grand party, Jubilee Party.

The events are significant because of what they mean for both horizontal accountability (intra-elite politics) and vertical accountability between wananchi and politicians.

Just to be clear, I am dubious about party strength in all its stripes. Party strength in Kenya means that the ethnic chiefs at the top run the show. Other elites typically have to pay homage to the ethnic chiefs; and check their brains and conscience at the door while at it.

The same parties treat wananchi as pawns. Wananchi are useful at rallies, for the occasional demonstration and “show of might,” and voting. ODM has perfected this style of party organisation. And JP will follow suit in no time. To understand why, you need only look at the involvement of wananchi in the formation and continued existence of both parties. ODM is essentially an elite-level ethnic confederation. Members of the party are not primarily loyal to the party itself, but to specific ethnic chiefs who allegedly represent their interests at Orange House.

Jubilee is not different. The affiliate parties of the Jubilee Alliance may have dissolved, but intra-party ethnic divisions will undoubtedly linger on. Ethnicity will still remain as the key organising principle that determines party positions and programmatic agenda.

In calling out our parties for what they are – elite-level ethnic confederations – I do not intend to suggest that there is no hope at all for a better, people-driven party system. The point here is that for us to know how to get there, we must understand what ails our parties. How can we get to a party system that is likely to care more about wananchi than the personal economic and political ambitions of our ethnic chiefs?

In my opinion, a good place to start would be to devolve powers and functions within the parties themselves. And our current governance system provides a template for the implementation of this idea.

The counties are fertile grounds for the development of 47 strong party branches which would then be mandated to run their own primaries, recruit and keep voters happy, and to decide on the identity of the delegates who get to choose presidential candidates.

Such kind of party set-up would have four important consequences. First, it would empower governors vis-à-vis county-level politicians and, perhaps most crucially, our ethnic chiefs. This system would enhance horizontal accountability by giving governors political powers in the counties which would then be counter-balanced by the constitutional powers accorded Members of Parliament.

Second, it would solve the capacity issues involved with the running of parties at the national level. Does ODM really exist outside of Orange House? Will JP exist in the counties? Probably not. Decentralising both parties would allow them to develop capacity and manage to penetrate the most far-flung corners of Kenya.

Third, strong county parties would solve problems of voter registration, electoral mobilisation and the protection of the vote on Election Day. One of the key challenges our main parties face is their lack of capacity to run efficient electoral machines. Decentralisation might help in this regard.

Lastly, anchoring our main parties in the counties will make them better able to respond to the needs of wananchi. People in Turkana have very different policy agendas from people in Taita Taveta. Party structures should reflect this reality. And so, as we toast and celebrate our ethnic chiefs this weekend, let’s spare a thought for how we can tame them in a manner that reinforces both horizontal and vertical accountability in Kenya’s politics.