By Public Watchdog
The Proposed Constitution of Kenya was published last Friday in the Kenya Gazette ushering in a phase for civil education and campaign period for adoption or rejection of the law.
The people will from now engage in a process that is clearly going to be contested, either side voting ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. One thing, however, is clear. Either side has differing reasons for their adopted positions.
Indeed, those in the ‘No’ divide support certain aspects, which have motivated others to have a contrary opinion.
Thus, there are inherently contradictory, differing and conflicting reasons why even those on the same side of the debate do not necessarily agree.
This a challenge to achieving consensus on the constitution making process.
In this respect, whatever the people’s verdict on the new constitution will be, it must be absolutely based on an informed position. Our leaders or any activists must not make the decisions on the basis of whimsical judgements or misrepresentation of fact. Yes, all leaders! Whether, it represents the political class, community and religious leaders or for that matter any characterisation of a leader. Why?
We are witnessing an emerging scenario, where some leaders — for political expediency — are engaged in deliberate distortion of facts on the content and implication of the draft law. Leadership is about making choices — real hard choices. It must not be informed by vested positions, but wider public interests. In this column, we have severally stated that the status quo with respect to the current constitution is not an option.
The current scenario is with respect to choosing between a progressive proposed document, though not perfect, and remaining with the current constitution, which is to blame for what is bedevilling our country.
What, then, are emerging fears by proponents of the Proposed Constitution that they continue to exhibit public nuisance and distortion of facts and theatrics?
Firstly, in this contestable position, we urge leaders to be true to themselves and the interests of the people.
It is essential for all leaders to engage in a reality check and avoid being driven by extraneous factors inconsistent with the demands of public interests.
Fence sitters
If, anyone chooses to oppose adoption of the draft for whatever reason, it is really a matter of right. However, it is critical that such position be based on informed knowledge and not distortion of facts or misrepresentation.
The people expect their leaders to guide them with resoluteness and not to mislead them. Leaders must not play safe as fence sitters on critical matters of national importance. They must stand to be counted and take resolute positions without engaging in hoo-hah.
Kenyans have watched with dismay as some leaders try to hoodwink them with a populist stand. It might work for now, but will catch up with them eventually.
We need truthful leaders and no matter how hard the realities or consequences, they must listen to their consciences.
Kadhis’ courts
Secondly, the Proposed Constitution is not a matter for political expediency as it is aimed at wider public interests of many generations to come. It is not matter for shared political ideology, leadership succession or control of economic wealth, but a matter of equity, fairness and social justice and/or better governance.
It is obvious those coalescing around ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ campaigns have nothing in common or, as indicated previously, have inherently differing and conflicting reasons. Thus, those opposed to the draft on account of provisions on Kadhis’ courts and clauses on abortion do not share concerns expressed over land clauses or devolution for that matter. Even those arguing against devolution do not also necessarily agree on the level of devolutions.
Thirdly, civic education is now critical at local and national levels to address a growing distortion of the message and competing actors. Kenyans must be sensitised on the content and benefits of the proposed law. The choices must be made clear so that they can make decisions based on facts.
Foundation of hope
It has been said that comparing the current and Proposed Constitution is not the way forward as Kenyans deserve the best. The question, however, is what is the ‘best’ and how can we achieve consensus on the ‘best’ given multiple and inherently conflicting interests?
We need to make move forward and the proposed draft contributes to that progress. We can then revisit any areas, which are unsatisfactory such as role of the proposed Land Commission beginning with legislating its mandate.
Public Watchdog maintains the position that given these choices, the hard reality is clear; A ‘Yes’ option represents a new foundation of hope towards a progressive nation and better governance structure.
And this matter is of compelling public interest!
Comments and suggestions to publicwatchdog@standardmedia.co.ke