Parliament returns to its current session, this afternoon amid raging, yet salient, national debate on threats to the implementation of the Constitution.
To state that the implementation has hit a gridlock would be an appropriate characterisation of the current impasse with respect to determination of additional constituencies. But is this a fact?
The hard reality is not yet, but the truth must now dawn on Kenyans and the political leadership that the number of constituencies remains a political equation.
It is not, has not been, and cannot be, simple arithmetic, but a complex political calculus that demands a political solution.
The current political theatrics aim to raise political temperatures as bargaining power in a now familiar horse-trading practice in the political world.
The political tug-of-war, last week saw adjournment of the debate on approval of Chairmen and persons to sit in the committees’ on Implementation of the new Constitution and that of Revenue Allocations.
Fruits of separation
The political wars are being fought in a multi-pronged way in all arms of government — the Executive, Judiciary and lastly politically in Parliament. Thus, at the core of the impasse is simply a dilatory measure behind the scenes, seeking political capital at the expense wider national interests.
The country missed a key milestone when constituting the two constitutional committees.
What are the implications and options open to Parliament on this impasse today?
Firstly, this could yet again become the Tenth Parliament’s defining moment and demonstration of resolute leadership on matters of significant public interests.
Last week, we delved into the role of Parliament in the vetting of appointees to several positions in public sector in accordance with the new constitutional order.
We have also seen how initial vetting was being conducted — a development that is encouraging, but must be structured in a manner consistent with international best practices.
We reiterate in this column that there is a national desire to develop vetting and debating guidelines on nominees to avoid political mudslinging in Parliament, without substantiation, where the candidates cannot defend themselves.
The new practice represents some of the fruits of separation of the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary with prescribed checks and balances. However, amid the current quagmire rests a resolute Tenth Parliament, which has proved its assertiveness and checks on the Executive, yet remains proactively engaged in a reformist quest.
The new Constitution is an outcome of a facilitative Tenth Parliament, and a resolute and wise Speaker Kenneth Marende. It is, therefore, difficult to imagine how the same MPs could seek to impede implementation of the Constitution on account of political machinations.
Secondly, given that this Parliament has proven its leadership, at least through majority resolutions, it still holds the key to unlocking the impasse. The robustness of the debate in the House has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that there are a some leaders willing to make personal sacrifices through selfless gumption.
Indeed, the very action to adjourn the debate last week and subsequent intervention by the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Constitution with respect to receiving report of the now defunct Interim Independent Boundaries Reform Commission (IIBRC), demonstrates unwavering determination towards implementation of the new Constitution.
Parliament’s actions, no matter how difficult to appreciate, were aimed at stemming threats of vested interests to use multiple machinations to defeat fair and independent determination of constituencies by IIBRC.
Thirdly, the legal questions must come after the event with respect to publication of reports and/or approvals or gazetting as applicable. Any second-guessing or prejudging an outcome would be an act of clairvoyance riddled with risk.
This question is, however, for the Courts to determine and not parliament. Parliament should also let the courts make its determinations, without itself seeking to second-guess the judgement.
Moreover, courts cannot prevent Parliament from carrying out its legislative role including, adoption of the reports on the additional constituencies and/or legislating on the same. Finally, Parliament must unlock the impasse and determine through majority decision the political calculus on the matter.
Do us proud
The matter was, is and remains a political matter of representation and the process has been vested on an independent commission. That Commission, IIBRC has made its determination, is now defunct and next commission can only, deal with the future.
The basis is clear and so with objectivity and not playing early succession cards for 2012 the matter can be resolved this afternoon.
Yes, this afternoon and latest tomorrow. We remain on course in implementing the new Constitution and honour every prescribed time schedule without yesteryears’ ‘horse and buggy’ practices. Our opportunity rests in our actions, today — and in the future — not the past that has since gone forever.
Yes, Mr Speaker, the Tenth Parliament has already done Kenya and its people proud, so do it again! Act decisively now and put this issue to vote being a matter of compelling public interest!
—Comments and suggestions to: publicwatchdog@standardmedia.co.ke