If there's nothing to hide, work with ICC

Short of a miracle, act of god or slide into civil war, nothing can stop the implementation of the remaining phases of the new Constitution and completion of Agenda Four.

After recriminations, horse-trading, party politicking and double-speak of the past few weeks, the House Business Committee finally tabled a list of 27 members to make up the Constitution Implementation Committee. The only sticky issue here is that the ruling coalition parties ODM and PNU omitted names of MPs that campaigned against the Proposed Constitution.

Other voices of dissent have included women, the disabled, church leaders, professional associations, and civil society, who have demanded inclusion into this crucial team.

And, yes, we feel they have a point for a process of such magnitude to be seen to be all-inclusive, even as MPs reconvene on Tuesday to continue debate on who should make the shortlist.

Hiccups have developed along the way, chief among them being the place of the Provincial Administration in the new constitutional dispensation.

The chief dissention had to do with the enormous power holders of these positions wielded under the Independence Constitution. Their reach was endless, from the most mundane — like chicken theft — and at times on matters of life and death.

greatest responsibility

Obviously, now that the Bill of Rights offers a protection from such impunity, many people are of the opinion that the Provincial Administration should have been scrapped altogether. But that is wishful thinking since the new laws say it will be restructured to fit the devolved system.

　

Then came the most contentious of matters. It has to do with the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the Prosecutor’s probe into who knew what, when and, therefore, who bore the greatest responsibility for the breaking out mayhem in 2008.

Originally, it appeared like a walk in the park since most Kenyans and the world community were agreed that any form of impunity bears consequences.

And the invitation of The Hague-based court’s probe was considered a sign of national maturity and general desire by the people and Government of Kenya to interrogate the past and hold hands into a brighter, cohesive future.

As the first court date in December nears, it appears that certain quarters are developing cold feet and talk is rife that the State may not fully co-operate with the investigators, as earlier promised. It would have been laughable if the objections had not come from none other than the Minister for Justice and Constitutional Affairs.

This, compounded by the silence and public absence of Government’s Chief Legal Advisor, the Attorney General, makes a mockery of the statesmen and women who stuck their necks out to find a peaceful solution when Kenya was in free-fall.

We hope the reassurance in Parliament by the Prime Minister that Kenya shall co-operate fully with the ICC probe is the last word on this matter.

Since the two principals — the President and Prime Minister — publicly signed a reconciliation accord that put a halt to hostilities and ushered in the ruling coalition, it is up to the same two gentlemen to engender discipline in the top ruling organ — Cabinet — that guides policy, not to routinely wash its dirty linen in public.

dark period

Rumour and misplaced broadsides are hardly the way to conduct the business of State. It is no longer desirable to appear divided by entrenching partisanship. Let the principals lead implementation of the new order of governance as in law provided, and speak with one voice.

If there is nothing to hide about the tragic events that left more than 200 Kenyans dead and 350,000 displaced, let the ICC scrutinise the minutes of security meetings held over that dark period and offer its verdict.

Let us lay to rest the ghosts of horrors past by being candid, transparent and honourable. We owe that to the victims whose lives were trashed and rights trampled over in 2008.