On The Kenyan Elections: Mere Technicalities Can’t Subvert The Voice Of The People

Folks, in reacting to happenings in Kenya regarding the overturning of the electoral fortunes of the incumbent Uhuru Kenyatta by the country’s Supreme Court, I have made my stance clear that the Court’s decision was nonsensical.

I don’t regret for going that way and won’t ever. Enough exists for my stance. All that the Court hinged on can be dismissed as mere technicalities that are detached from what actually happened on the ground when the voters thumb-printed the ballot papers. What did the Supreme Court find wrong with that thumb-printing to warrant its decision? None!! Instead, its focus was on the means by which the outcome of the elections was transmitted. Sheer poppycock, removed from the reality on the ground regarding the electoral decisions made by voters, which is the recipe for disaster!!

As the NPP’s Dr. Borrowmia had told the Ghanaian panel of Supreme Court judges hearing the NPP’s useless petition at the 2012 hearing, “You and I were not there”. But what was being used to tilt the table in favour of the genuine losers of the polls was the “pink sheet” and whether it was duly endorsed by those certified to do so. In effect, then, mere technicalities on display and being used to subvert the verdict of the voters who stood in the sweltering heat to make their voices heard on who should rule them. Okay.

So, the mechanism regarding the Kenyan electoral process was spelt out clearly. The Supreme Court fell for the technicalities, as has been “captured” in this self-explanatory analysis by the BBC.

“The Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission (IEBC) was expected to follow laid-down procedures for conducting the elections and announcing the results from the lowest to the highest levels.

But it's the way the results were transmitted, rather than the actual voting process, which was riddled with irregularities. There was a legal requirement to send copies of the signed returns from every one of more than 40,000 polling stations to the central results centre.

These 34A forms would quickly prove the accuracy of the initial results, electronically delivered from across the country. It was on this basis that the international observer missions declared their support for the process.

But when the election results were announced, there were claims as many as 11,000 forms were missing—and this appears to have been the focus of the court's deliberations.Verifying such huge volumes of data - and paper - in the tight time-frame allowed for the court to make a ruling was always going to be difficult. The four judges who overruled the two dissenting opinions believed there was enough uncertainty to undermine the entire process.” (See http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-41129919).

So, folks, we can see now where the apples are and where the oranges stand. Comparing both in this situation makes a mockery of the verdict of the voters who weathered the storm (the heat, the inconveniences, and many other debilitating factors) to vote.

The substantial issue now is: Should attention be focused on the exact happenings at the various polling stations in terms of what the voters went for or should it be reduced to mere technicalities on how the verdict of the voters was transmitted?

Let us not go any further into this issue. But we can say at this point that what the Supreme Court of Kenya has come out with is more of a complication than a solution to the problem that Kenya has faced ever since the descendants of the two bitterest political foes have pitted their strengths and weaknesses against each other.

Uhuru Kenyatta is the son of Kenya’s independence hero, Jomo Kenyatta, whose exploits within the ambit of the Mau Mau got the British authorities fearing their own shadows. Indeed, Jomo Kenyatta can be rightfully regarded as the “Father of Kenya” just as Ghana’s Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah remains the “Founder of Ghana”. Let haters go to blazes!!

On the other hand, Raila Odinga, at 72 years now, is the son of the failed opposition leader, Odinga Oginga, who has nothing standing in Kenya as a monument to commemorate his politicking. Even, the forces that backed him in his reactionary political mischief against the rightful forces to liberate Kenya have long written him off as a marked failure to be pooh-poohed. Why his son should attempt resuscitating his memory/image at this time when there is nothing positive in history about him baffles me.

Folks, let us get it right here that Kenya is one of the countries in Africa that is well-known for its contacts with the early European marauders. The intellectuals (also known as explorers or journalists/writers (Stephen M. Stanley, Lord Luggard, etc.) who explored it and wrote enticing news reports about its abundant resources might have facilitated the annexation of Kenya (especially the Kenyan Highlands) by the British after the Berlin Conference in 1884/85.

Find out why the Gikuyus, Masais, and other deprived communities can’t to date claim the land as theirs or why they fight over water and grazing land while the “foreigners” owing the Kenyan Highlands exalt in their world of plenty. Too bad.

Turn your eyes to Nairobi, a sprawling city that has become the haven for all manner of Kenyans seeking means for survival but not finding it when most needed. If you look closely at why Raila Odinga is exploiting the plight of the down-trodden Kenyan “rejects” living in slums in Nairobi, you shouldn’t go far. It’s all a matter of technicalities.

Folks, we want to say at this point that what the Kenyan Supreme Court has come out with is a mere test of pulse that will dissipate as soon as the verdict of the people is reinforced at the polls in the next 60 days as proposed. Had the Supreme Court found evidence of vote rigging at the polls, we might be taking a different stance. But for as long as its verdict is based on what doesn’t have anything to do with why the voters voted the way they did, t he least thought about or said about it, the better.

Sixty days isn’t far off. I hope that all will be put in place for the re-run, even as there is concern about the Supreme Court’s own inadequacies in not suggesting measures for resolving the crisis. In its ver4dict, it only found fault with technicalities in the transmission of results without offering any suggestion for what should be done at the polls.

So, if the voters mobilize themselves to challenge its verdict, what follows? In our kind of politics, mere te4chnicalituies belong to the realm of the Don Quixotes, not the real voters feeling the pinch of governance and wanting their voices heard through the ballot that they cast at the polls.

This Kenyan example is a clear instance of a confused system that plays more to the rivalry between political forces than serving the needs of the deprived people wishing for a system of governance to help them enjoy the benefits of democracy—improved living standards such as good drinking water, access to schools for education, decent accommodation, access to good health, education, social welfare and many other facilities to make them live their lives in some measured comfort before they pass on).

Unfortunately, what this Kenyatta and Odinga political rivalry is wreaking on Kenya is nothing to be proud of. Those who freed Uhuru Kenyatta and his co-accusers from trial at the International Criminal Court in terms of the disaster that occasioned his election to power some two years ago should begin revising their notes. The storm is gathering for a repeat. (Why didn’t they also charge Raila Odinga anyway? After all, lives got lost because of their political rivalry, which he was part of).

Here comes the main issue for contention. Considering the barrage of damnatory criticisms from his political opponents (all over Ghanaweb and other media) against John Dramani Mahama as the head of the Commonwealth Observer team that monitored the Kenyan polls and certified it as fair and free) what could Mahama have done to retain Uhuru in power if he was out of it in the verdict of the Kenyan voters?

Eventually, what does Kenya under Uhuru have to offer Ghana with Mahama out of power? (We have seen pictures of Mahama enjoying his vacation in some parts of Kenya; but what does that give Ghanaians, generally? And how will Akufo-Addo deal wit h Kenya as such, knowing very well that a historical link exists between both countries: Ghana’s former Chief Justice Akpaloo was appointed as Kenya’s Chief Justice, and the army general Joshua Hamidu under Rawlings sought refuge in Kenya before re-surfacing as whatever he might want to be upheld).

Folks, African politics is still in its myopic stage, given what we have seen thus far? Too much to get us going!! So much for now. Later!!

I am gone for now but will return!!

• E-mail: [email protected]
• Join me on Facebook at: http://www.facebook.com/mjkbokor to continue the conversation.