Opinion: Political parties are the bane of our maturing democracy

Nairobi lawyer Donald Kipkorir PHOTO:COURTESY

"We should frown at defectors and the so-called independents," railed top Nairobi lawyer Donald Kipkorir last week. "Without being loyal to parties and ideology, we can't be loyal to anything. You can't join a party and be given life membership then switch (sic)."
"Independents are nothing but opportunists," he concluded.

In many ways, Mr Kipkorir was expressing what is wrong with our politics, much so our democracy: The absence of ideology and principled loyalty is the bane of our politics. In fact I wonder what will happen in August if what we saw was anything to go by.

So like rivers, most of us politicians will follow the route of least resistance. Indeed most of what we saw in the last two weeks was an empty charade where loyalty and allegiance to ideals were sacrificed at the altar of political expediency. There was no contest of ideas. In fact, in most, save for a few places, those connected to the owners of the party went away with the tickets.

Over time, parties have morphed into something quite sinister. They are vehicles for self-glorification and self-promotion. A lot of them don't, in the slightest, advance the aspirations of the citizenry. We will join a party not because we believe in what it stands for, but because it assures us of a seat at the high table.

THE CLOWNS

Look around, the most clownish of us and the ne'er-do-wells will find space in the most popular parties. There is a lot of room for them there. And because allegiance to ideals has been subjugated to the whims of party "owners", we will not question why we allow politicians to pigeonhole us into tribal cocoons called parties. The party owners are obviously blinded by the clowns who come with money and resources for mobilisation activities.

In other democracies like the UK, party primaries are not held to test the suitability of candidates for the Conservative Party. Those who end up as MPs are competent, loyal members. Someone is actually born into a party.

They are free to renounce membership later in life. Most don't. So the party accords the most competent of its members the honours to be MP not just any Tom, Dick or Harry. The Labour party does the opposite.

Aspirants are subjected to a primary like ours where the best (if you like) secures a ticket to represent the party in the House of Commons. Like in our case, that has its challenges.Inherent problems like the lack of a binding ideology that often breeds distrust and disloyalty and people undermining the leadership, are rife.

When former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair faced a rebellion instigated by his ineffectual successor, Gordon Brown, he lamented in his book ; A Journey, that he had no problem with "Gordon's people" wanting him out "provided it was for a purpose other than simply that of Gordon doing the job rather than me.

What is always unacceptable is to chip away, to refuse the open challenge, to corrode. That is disloyal because it weakens the party; it doesn't change it or redirect it." We see a lot of that here. The Rainbow Coalition was brought by a fratricidal fight between members and so did the original ODM.

Yet to condemn parties and the independents wholesome is to miss the point. In the beginning, the barriers to being a political party member were quite high. Getting expelled from Kanu was akin to social ostracisation. Then, not being a party member meant you missed a lot. So the floodgates were opened following the repeal of Section 2 (a) in 1991 that ushered in multi-partyism.

All manner of parties were formed. Remember the tragic splinter of the original FORD into three parties? An epidemic broke out and everyone wanted a party. It is then that I came to learn of something called briefcase parties; parties that existed only in name. No membership, no address. And there were plenty of them. They became active during election time and went dormant in the intervening period.

I am sure that is not what the proponents of multiparty politics had in mind. If it was meant to create a contest of leadership, it didn't achieve that. If it was meant to unite and empower those who felt they had been left behind, it did not. It continues to do the opposite.

Mr Guleid is Deputy Governor, Isiolo County. [email protected]