Public officers should learn to resolve their differences amicably, internally

By Justin Kimani

Last week’s ceasefire between Attorney General Githu Muigai and Constitutional Implementation Commission Chairman Charles Nyachae came as a relief to an increasingly worried public.

This being an election year, the conduct of every Kenyan of goodwill should cultivate peace and reconciliation.

This is absolutely necessary to avoid even the remotest possibility of a repeat of post-election violence.

It is demanded of public officers and other leaders, whose examples Kenyans are looking up to, to make a deliberate and concerted effort to promote reconciliation.

They owe it to Kenyans to be accommodating and to conduct themselves with humility and tolerance, in acknowledgement of the privilege of holding positions in trust for the public.

It has been stressful to Kenyans that some public officers, especially those charged with interpreting and implementing the Constitution, to publicise their differences in the media.

The language used has been unpalatable and unexpected of such officers.

Their exchanges have been incensing the public who are already hurting from many other acts of mismanagement in public service.

They give doubts, instead of assurance, about their competence to steer Kenya through the critical reform and transformation process essential to a peaceful election.

The wrangles were creating, in the minds of the public, the impression that they are a result of lack of previous experience in public offices.

Their exchange might also cast doubts on the veracity of the selection criteria that placed them in such important positions.

The offices of the Justice minister, the AG and the CIC have the highest concentration of learned friends.

From them, complimentary, not contradictory expert advice should come and facilitate delivery of the service essential to the constitutional implementation.

To the disappointment of many, some of these officers spend the limited and valuable time seemingly seeking public attention and recognition of their role and expertise in law, which may not have been obvious, without some publicity.

In contention have been the date of the next election, and the mechanics of implementation of the Constitution and processing of Bills through Parliament.

The storm was kicked off by the CIC chairman in what seems like defiance of authority and insubordination.

The press reported him to have ‘rejected’ Cabinet’s approval and recommendation to Parliament, of the Bill to change the date of the elections from August to December.

The change had been supported by the chairman of the Independent Electoral Boundaries Commission, the expert in this area, and the Justice minister, who is a member of the Cabinet. The differences could have been resolved through internal consultation.

The controversy between the AG and the Constitutional Implementation Commission chairman about the interpretation of the sections dealing with their individual mandates in the implementation of the Constitution is another cause of stress to the increasingly worried public.

Exposing their differences and confrontation through the media, instead of consulting internally, creates doubts on their capability to deliver on their mandate.

It casts doubts on the credibility of the criteria for the selection process, which identified them. It behooves the appointer to immediately require the officers to perform or replace them, in the public interest, with others from the unlimited pool of talented Kenyans being wasted, who can deliver timely.

Timely and efficient implementation of the Constitution is critical to ensuring peaceful elections.

The Constitution is the single most important of the milestones necessary to avoid elections resulting into violence.

The writer is a consultant and researcher in peace building and conflict transformation

Related Topics