Winner takes all theory can only be confronted by the law, its agents

Whenever politicians speak of amending the Constitution they invariably insist that the ‘winner takes all’ principle of governance has jeopardised security of the country at each General Election and so other options must be explored. It may have slipped their minds but the same argument was used by proponents of devolution during the making of the 2010 Constitution. Devolution was floated as the panacea to underdevelopment, marginalisation and ethnic conflict. Now we have devolved governance secured in a progressive Constitution but the ‘winner takes all’ precedent prevails. 

If we are to believe Moses Kuria, however, having a President from your own turf brings no tangible benefits since most national resources are used to woo voters in opposition areas. He claimed this week that the only award Kiambu residents have received from voting en masse for Uhuru Kenyatta was certificates issued to recovering alcoholics.
Joking aside, most voters subscribe to the notion that of ‘mtu yetu’ (One of our own) is in State House we will all have sausages for breakfast because it is now ‘our turn to eat’. Kuria clearly supports that ideology and resents the president’s commitment to build a tarmac road in Nyanza while there are farmers in Kiambu whose tractors cannot make it to market in the rainy season.

Poverty and neglect

Of course in the process he is acknowledging that there is poverty, needs and neglect in his home area as well as in every other corner of the republic. That is a very hard truth for most Kenyans to swallow but a quick trip through the country reveals horrific poverty and neglect in Baringo, Pokot, Nyeri, North Kitui, Kiambu and Bondo even though these areas produced Presidents and Prime Ministers and their deputies over the years. 

True, institutions of higher education may have been built in remote areas to give employment and esteem to local people and roads were constructed that were more benefit to sleeping cows than moving trucks. But the vast majority of Kenyans in these aforementioned areas remain dirt poor with no tangible benefit from having someone speaking their language floating about in a helicopter from state house to state house. So is the ‘winner takes all’ a myth? 

Whoever occupies the top seat clearly brings only minimal benefit to his ethnic community. The real beneficiaries are the cronies, the tenderpreneurs, the mafia, the idlers, the funders of campaign and the drug lords who propel their man to power and who now expect to be rewarded handsomely with appointments, tenders, land, trips and allowances.

The winner of course should be allowed to appoint people he can trust in key positions in government, but when  - as is currently the case - the President and his deputy have a disproportionate number of their own tribesmen and women in the Cabinet, heading Government bodies and heads of parastatals, then that just isn’t right. When the same characters have used their ethnicity and cronyism as cover to steal with impunity, then no wonder the other 42 tribal leaders want their turn.

The culture of theft

The solution of course is not to increase the number of seats at the table because that will just result in more feasting and more vomit on shoes. Yet, that is the proposal of the National Delegates Conference that proposes a Prime Minister and two deputies as well as a President and his junior. That would in all likelihood just allow the Big 5 to have their own wo(man) at the trough and to hell with the other 39. The culture of ‘the winner takes all’ is just as prevalent, however, in every county where some communities, clans, religions and areas are excluded because they differ with their governors.

There is no simple answer but the Constitution does offer remedy if we are to apply Article 27 on equality or Articles 73, 129, 174,201 and 232 which give us principles of leadership, integrity, executive authority, public finance and public service. Rather than amend the Constitution it is necessary to apply what is there to address the greed, rot and corruption.
Ultimately, the winner takes all principle can only be confronted by the law and its agents. The culture of theft has been devolved to the counties and in its present form can remain even under a Parliamentary system. We should not fool ourselves by constructing new models of governance but support wholeheartedly the office of DPP and CID to bring to book fish of every size who have looted this country under the justification of ‘winner takes all’.

- [email protected] @GabrielDolan1