Colleagues Home & Abroad Regional News
from ouko joachim omolo
BY FR JOACHIM OMOLO OUKO, AJ
NAIROBI-KENYA
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 2011
Even though Uhuru Kenyatta and Francis Muthaura have denied the allegation by the International Criminal Court (ICC) that they organised deadly attacks against rival supporters after the disputed 2007 polls to keep PNU in power by “any means necessary”, the fact remains that their reputations have been tinted and to repair it would not be very easy.
According to ICC Prosecutor Adesola Adeboyejo the Deputy Prime Minister and Head of Civil Service created a common plan and policy to retaliate against the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) supporters and to ensure the Party of National Unity (PNU) remained in power.
While Muthaura and Kenyatta she said organised and directed forces which then unleashed the attacks, former Police Commissioner Hussein Ali directed the police to stand down in order to create a safe passage for the Mungiki to attack ODM supporters in Naivasha.
Kenyatta on his part the court heard used Mungiki given his long time ties with them. In 2002 Kenyans were surprised to see the outlawed sect demonstrating in Nairobi by the (“Daily Nation,” August 21, 2002) ostensibly in support of President Moi and political protégé Uhuru Kenyatta, a fact that the ICC confirmation hearing court could have used to assert that Uhuru has been having a long tie with Mungiki.
The sect, drawn mainly from the Kikuyu ethnic group, marched through Nairobi waving placards expressing solidarity with the president Moi and his choice of Uhuru Kenyatta as his successor to fight for the presidency in elections in 2002. The sect demonstrated because Moi had been criticised within the ruling Kanu party over his endorsement of Mr Kenyatta.
This was the same time (“East African Standard,” August 19, 2002) the Catholic Church condemned calls by two MPs that they would mobilise Mungiki sect members if members of the public continued insulting President Moi.
Fr Emmanuel Ngugi of then in charge of Holy Family Basilica was reacting to remarks made by former Juja MP, Mr Stephen Ndichu, and his Molo counterpart, Mr Dickson Kihika Kimani, that they would use Mungki to fight anyone opposing President Moi.
Mungiki, Kikuyu for “multitude” or “masses,” started as a religious movement in 1987 when one of its founder Maina Njenga saw a vision in which, he says, God commanded him to lead his people out of bondage.
The Mungiki grew rapidly during the 1990s, a time of severe political turbulence and violence surrounding the movement to restore multiparty democracy to Kenya. This was the time the Moi regime instigated ethnic violence against Kikuyu communities in Rift Valley Province through private ethnic militias-for-hire in 1992 and then again in 1997. In the mid-1990sthe sect became involved in vigilante activity to “protect” Kikuyu slum dwellers.
In the recent shooting of two prominent Kenyan human-rights campaigners, Kamau King’ara and Paul Oulo, it was alleged that the Mungiki were involved because the duo had been investigating death squads widely thought to be linked to senior politicians. It was immediately assumed that the pair had been silenced by orders from on high to cover up the evidences.
Mr King’ara had said that at least 1,700 young Kenyans had been shot or tortured to death by death squads during President Mwai Kibaki’s first term in office between 2002 and 2007, while another 6,500-plus had disappeared, probably also at the hands of government goons.
It was not just an isolated allegation. Previous month Philip Alston, a UN investigator, published a report documenting around 500 death-squad executions in the months leading up to the election of December 2007, whose disputed results led to 1,500 or so deaths and the displacement of at least 300,000 Kenyans in the subsequent violence.
Mr Alston, an Australian, called for the chief of police, Hussein Ali, and the attorney-general, Amos Wako, to resign. They show no sign of doing so. Hours before the two campaigners were killed the government’s spokesman Dr Alfred Mutua accused Mr King’ara of raising funds for the feared Mungiki.
Uhuru’s lawyer however, do not want him crucified alone, he also wants President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga to appear for trials in The Hague since they were the ones who were behind the violence.
According to articles 27 and 28 of the Rome Statute, on which the International Criminal Court is founded, Kibaki and Raila could easily be called to The Hague anyway. Article 27, titled “Irrelevance of official capacity”, removes any immunity to prosecution on the basis of status in society. Section 2 of the same article makes irrelevant the provisions of the Kenya Constitution that grant a sitting head of state immunity from prosecution.
It reads: “Immunities or special procedural rules which may attach to the official capacity of a person, whether under national or international law, shall not bar the Court from exercising its jurisdiction over such a person.”
The two leaders’ responsibility for crimes committed under their watch is captured in Article 28 of the Rome Statute which says that “a superior shall be criminally responsible for crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court committed by subordinates under his or her effective authority and control, as a result of his or her failure to exercise control properly over such subordinates, where:
(i) The superior either knew, or consciously disregarded information which clearly indicated, that the subordinates were committing or about to commit such crimes;
(ii) The crimes concerned activities that were within the effective responsibility and control of the superior; and
(iii) The superior failed to take all necessary and reasonable measures within his or her power to prevent or repress their commission or to submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution.”
Uhuru and William Ruto see The Hague as politically incorrect to bar them from standing as presidential candidates in 2012. That Raila is afraid Uhuru could easily defeat him since Uhuru is slowly but steadily emerging as the most likely potential presidential designee of the Kikuyus — should they decide to back a candidate for president.
The fact that Kibaki has not mentioned Uhuru as his successor, Minister John Michuki who has also been mentioned at the ICC hearings that he organized Mingiki to attack non Kikuyus in Kibera, has made an interesting declaration that anyone interested in getting the Agikuyu vote must co-operate with Uhuru Kenyatta.
Since Gichugi Member of Parliament Martha Karua who hails from Kirinyagah showed her interest of contesting for presidency in 2012, it has been the wish of Michuki and other Gikuyu elders that Karua form an alliance with Uhuru as the sole presidential candidate.
Ms Karua has ever since distanced herself from ethnic political alliances and has refused to play second fiddle to Uhuru Kenyatta in central Kenya politics. She is on record saying that the era of political dynasty is gone and Kenyans should be allowed to elect leaders based on choice.
Environment Minister John Michuki last year sparked controversy, when he declared Uhuru would succeed President Kibaki as the community’s leader. He had hinted anyone eyeing the vote-rich region must recognise Uhuru or brace for a fight.
Karua dismissed Michuki’s ‘dictatorial’ suggestions, saying the electorate should decide without coercion.
Ethnic mobilisation has been routine in Kenya since 1963. The plot has been to harvest tribal votes and then the tribal chieftains use the bloc to negotiate for their own political agenda, even if that meant shedding of blood.
But even so, Uhuru will find it very difficult to excel through for fear that he will use the tactics of his father to take Kenyans back where land could easily continued to be grabbed and people opposed to his style of leadership shown a different way as his father did.
This is also the fear expressed on William Ruto that he could easily turn Kenya to the dark era of Moi where corruption and ethnic cleansing would be the order of the day. Rutu was with Moi when the 1990s’ ethnic clashes were being carried on.
However, with G7 alliance, Uhuru thinks he is in a better position to win even if Karua distanced herself from him. He believes the vast majority of Kikuyu will vote him even if votes were divided because of Karua and likely Peter Keneth who has also shown the interest.
Uhru also banks on Minister of Security Georgs Saitoti and Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka should Uhuru be the sole candidate. He banks on the VP because of the Kamba community, which is closely related to the Kikuyu community.
Although tensions between the Kalenjin and Kikuyu communities remain high and make an alliance problematic, the political imperatives driving potential cooperation between Kenyatta and Ruto cannot be dismissed also. Probably that is why Uhuru and Ruto think that The Hague was staged by Raila to ensure they don’t stand for presidency.
Letter to the Editor
THE INVENTION OF TRIBALISM IN AFRICA
By Chrispine Onyango- Nairobi, Kenya
Generally speaking, most African countries have suffered for long as a result of tribalism. A very good example is Kenya. Africans historically were known to embrace community living and therefore there was no tribal division. This concept of tribal division was brought about by the Europeans who believed that Africans lived in tribes and that tribal loyalties were the only primitive stuff of African Politics.
Therefore they divided Africa into tribes, and where these tribes did not exist, they had to be invented by them. In many cases there were ethnic identities, based on the kinship of common traditions, language, social and religious customs and history. Each ethnic group were to live by themselves without crossing to the rest of the other groups.
This trend has been embraced by some African countries like Kenya. In fact nowadays it’s very hard for a Luo to stays at ease with a Kikuyu or a Kikuyu with a Kalenjin. In short each ethnic community will be at peace his own tribes mate. This trend has even affected the religious sectors. Each priest or pastor desires to identify himself with his own tribe mate.
In my view I encourage Raphael Tuju to go for presidency even if majority of Luos will object his idea. Though his battle may seem as that of David and Goliath in the Bible as Fr Joachim had stated it earlier, Tuju should courageously break the dominance of this tribal based dynasty in Lluo Nyanza.
I couldn’t really understand why Tuju did not make to Parliament. For any one who has not been to that place should make an attempt or ask those who know like me. Luos should know that we don’t need idealists nor sophists but people who are ready to work for Kenyans.
People for Peace in Africa (PPA)
P O Box 14877
Nairobi
00800, Westlands
Kenya
Tel +254-7350-14559/+254-722-623-578
E-mail- ppa@africaonline.co.ke
omolo.ouko@gmail.com
Website: www.peopleforpeaceafrica.org