Regional nature of our politics unfortunate but unavoidable

The other day, I received a message which was widely circulated to Kenyan bloggers where a reader gave me as an example of how hypocritical Kenyan politicians can be. His reason is that my column is often about good governance, but he felt there was a contradiction in my campaign with Uhuru Kenyatta who is facing charges of crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court.

He said I support Uhuru because I am a tribalist. He probably did not know that I am with Uhuru because I am in the party he leads, TNA and that I do not belong to the same ethnic community as him. In any case, my integrity cannot be judged purely on the basis of which candidate I support for President unless you are sure there is a clear personal vested interest on my part.

We clearly have to contend with the very local nature of politics that makes the leading presidential candidates masters at tribal based political unions. 

We all know that it is hard for a Bukusu, Kalenjin or Luo politician to make it in political parties other than the ones popular in their respective regions.

Unfortunately, even when we criticise we are often doing so from a tribal angle, because the one being criticised is not supporting our tribal candidate.

Should we bar Kenyans from supporting their regional candidates when it is within their democratic right to do so?

Just because Uhuru is a Kikuyu does not make him any less of nationalist than his opponents who also belong to some tribe.

Fortunately, even as they all focus at home, they have to campaign nationally and make an effort to craft national working teams before, during and after the campaigns. In fact, Kenyans can even be guiltier of parochialism in voting patterns than the politicians they vote for.

That is why I have to decide if I am more useful to my constituents by losing or wining an election, especially if they have decided on which candidate to back.

Moreover, is it fair to deny Uhuru his right to contest for political office when the law presumes him to be innocent until found guilty?

Why are we not making as much effort to bar leaders who have been linked with all sorts of scams and are seeking even higher public offices?

There is also the larger question of why Uhuru would be such a prime suspect and villain when he was not a candidate about whom the battle was fought; the presidency.

As he has often said, when he lost his bid for President in 2002, he did not mobilise his tribesmen to go fighting for him to be installed President but, instead graciously accepted defeat.

What we must do in the long-term is build structures that will support greater national harmony. The constitutional requirement that a future president has to appeal to at least 25 counties, and have to garner 50 per cent plus one votes and, the one third rule on civil service composition, are two ways of forcing candidates to be more integrative in their campaigns and in the Governments they will form if they win.

We can leave the rest to the future President; to accomplish what Nyerere did for Tanzania.