Lessons from the elections and what it means for our country

In the space of three months, Kenya has conducted two presidential elections. On August 8, voters lined up for hours at polling stations, waiting their turn to cast votes for their representatives - President, governor, senator, Member of Parliament and Member of the County Assembly.

The results of the presidential election were contested in court by the Opposition National Super Alliance (NASA) and the Supreme Court nullified the election and directed that a repeat poll should be conducted within 60 days from the September 1 date of nullification.

These have been 60 days of acrimony, threats, accusations and counter-accusations that have threatened the very foundation of our country. At no other time has politics driven such deep wedges between Kenyans on opposing sides of the political divide.

Our nascent democracy has been shaken to its foundations. The efficacy of the 2010 Constitution has been put to the test. In this, there have been lessons for national institutions that uphold democracy, namely an independent Judiciary, the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC), the Legislature, the Executive, civil society and the media.

Collectively, what these institutions need to do going forward is to ensure that democracy flourishes. They need to learn from the abundance of mistakes we have made in the past.

The hardest task for our leaders now is to bring together the many parts that make up Kenya. Our unity stands threatened going by the events of the past few days. Lives have been lost during a political contest, yet that should never have been the case.

The economy is battered as a consequence of the growing disharmony. It will need careful nursing and an enabling environment to get it moving again. There is need to invest in infrastructure that guarantees quick returns and that has a direct impact on those who feel left out.

Equally important is the need to have a paradigm shift in the outlook of our political parties. The question is; will they change with the times or will they stay as they are? Clearly, they need to change and metamorphose into ideology-driven forums where the public gets to push its common agenda.

For as long as parties remain personal property for politicians, Kenyans will get a raw deal. Politicians should also accept that in a contest, there are going to be winners and losers. And that to lose is not the end of the world. It is also time to consider whether our winner-takes-all approach suits our situation, and how losers can contribute to nation-building. For a long time, this has been a bone of contention.

It is largely expected that Uhuru Kenyatta will get a new, albeit flawed mandate. He needs to promote inclusivity and adopt policies that are pro-poor and geared towards raising economic productivity.

He will be killing two birds using one stone. The grievance by the Opposition, if one were to believe them, is that the cake is not being passed around. What Uhuru needs to do is bake an even bigger cake to share with, not necessarily all, but certainly more people.

Raila Odinga’s call for civil disobedience could be counter-productive. His call to his supporters amounts to economic sabotage that could end up hurting the very same people he is trying to help. Social capitalism has no place in a liberal market like ours. There are better ways of addressing these grievances. Boycotting products on the basis of who owns them is foolhardy and undermines the economy. A businessman of no mean repute himself, Raila knows better about inter-connectivity in the economy.

The international community, in the period after September 1, has had egg on its face. After looking the other way and even coaxing Raila to 'accept and move on', Uhuru's win was nullified.

They will have to do more to convince Kenyans that they mean well. Put another way, it could be that we are on our own and that this election has taught us the folly of depending on outsiders (with their interests) to help us chart our future.