from Judy Miriga

Folks,

This is very good piece of debate I can’t resist to interject. I love it when people confront to demand for justice the truth.

People visualize things differently. Some will understand intelligent criticism to mean insult or matusi kidogo dogo, others will see it as Nyef nyef etc., but the fact remains that Miguna Miguna is deliberating facts and posing a valid subject for debate over critical matters of significant important that touch on our daily lives…….matters that are able to drive Kenyan leadership into progressive development on case scenario that must undergo objective criticism and interrogation to test someone’s ability of responsibility and integrity of character, someone who gear-up to take position of public leadership. At this point, whoever seeks public office, becomes a public matter and concerns………he or she ceases to be personal and private.

Public have a right and freedom according to their Constitutional Rights to engage such candidates into opening up and being answerable to such criticism………

This is why, RAO has become a public subject for debate interest to be chambuad…….dissected……..sliced……..must pass the test and be proven beyond reasonable doubt that he can rule, that he can deliver on a fair playing field to public without discrimination or favor………that he is capable to protect security of life and public wealth and negotiate fairly to promote progressive development without conspiring through corruption, impunity and graft….that he is capable to treats all human being fairly, with empaty and dignity, that he is able to honor public freedom and liberty according to constitutional policy without meandering into conspiracies………. hapana nyef nyef….

So Miguna is just doing RAO a rightful constitutional justice……it should not be based on cheap thinking of personal vendetta. Raila must publicly provide his Resume profile, who, what and how his ideas will relate to Devolved Counties in a strategic popular progressive development Agenda on his focused 2030 development plan……..how this focus will be different to that of Moi, Kibaki or the Kenyattas past regime……..he should explain why he did, aided or supported things that were in contrast or against public mandate and he should tell us, how he is going to administratively perform and balance to provide services and deliver public MANDATE, needs and demands on a fair playing field without corruption, impunity or graft, and whether or not, he subscribe to “It is our Time to Eat” as professed by his boot soldiers Agents on the ground, and why not…..

So Ajus and other RAO phobia masqueraders, chill……get it right that, Raila is clearly and rightly a subject of public scrutiny because he has appended that he is seeking to stand for the next election as the President of Kenya…..he must pass the test and he will not escape public interrogation, ……This is different from cases where people go after their fathers’ property rights or family business……..I dont know what zoning Nyanza means in this context. But one thing I know, that RAO does not own Nyanza people or voters, and phycophancy is irrelevant, a done deal in the present constitutional pact for Reform Agenda.

If this is why Miguna Miguna’s life was threatened, then welcome to the show and join the club……….

Cheers everybody…….

Judy Miriga
Diaspora Spokesperson
Executive Director
Confederation Council Foundation for Africa Inc.,
USA
http://socioeconomicforum50.blogspot.com

– – – – – – – – – – –

— On Tue, 11/22/11, ANTONY MBAYAKI wrote:

From: ANTONY MBAYAKI
Subject: Miguna Miguna: ODM Should Not Attempt To Zone Nyanza
Date: Tuesday, November 22, 2011, 9:08 AM

Ajus

If you are a problem and we feel your leadership is a sellout though fanatically believed in, is our responsibility to point out. Tell me is it possible to separate a persons name from his ideas. look even you has to mention, mig migs, onyi, Ochuodho etc. Basically you are refusing to be wide open to knew ideas and reflect. if you did, You would advise RAobing hood and he would even become a better leader and we will switch to him. Coz he knows how to tell folk tales and tsunami nyefnyefand that is entertaining to me I must admit. :))

Antonio wa mflame mwema

Voice from desert of Tekoa where giant murderes are generated.

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:55 AM, Kathukya Mundu wrote:

Because RAO keeps on stoning them! Oppose him at your own peril courtesy of people like YOU Ayombe..

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Ajus Cirilus wrote

The danger with this approach and the reason opposition in Nyanza never goes far is the focus on RAO rather than issues. Why can’t Mig Mig, Ochuodho, Onyango Oloo and Tuju come together with a new ideology and market it without pulling in RAO? Without unity purposed to give an alternative political vehicle, what they are doing in tantamount to personal attack and a mere talk, pet talk.

Ajus

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 4:56 AM, Margaret Gichuki wrote:

Oh ….THIS MAN Mig-Mig.

On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Kuria-Mwangi wrote:

Ati carpetbaggers? Hii kijana iko na matusi kiasi yake…Read on

The Keys to the 47 Counties Don?t Belong to Carpetbaggers

By Miguna Miguna

Violence ? especially political violence – of any nature is abhorrent. It demonstrates a failure to reason. The only violence which is morally and legally justified is one exercised in self-defence or in defence of children and innocent civilians. Gratuitous and barbaric violence like the one that was witnessed in Kisumu against Raphael Tuju a few days ago cannot be justified or excused. It must be condemned unreservedly.

Nobody has the keys or exclusive rights to any part of the country ? Kisumu included. Political leaders have a duty to ensure that they encourage, and participate in, peaceful democratic exercises. Democracy isn?t just about the people governing themselves through their elected representatives; it is also politics through discussions and debates.

Criticism is part and parcel of a democratic culture. Robust debates and peaceful challenges amongst political competitors or between their respective supporters constitute the DNA that makes up modern democratic politics. We must encourage our leaders to vigorously debate and disagree over their respective visions, policies, ideologies and programs. This will enable the people to critically assess their candidatures and determine who amongst them is best suited to be our next president. That determination cannot occur through hooliganism, comedy, funeral dirges, riddles or theatrics.

All presidential candidates must have unfettered access to the people in all corners of the republic. If the people?s (and by extension the candidates?) freedom of expression and association – and the right to criticise each other – are stifled, the people will resort to violence to resolve their differences. Yet, physical confrontations due to political differences cause instability and negate the principles of good governance enunciated in the Constitution. Violence is also inimical to development.

Disagreement is healthy. It?s the engine of modern human civilization. Active disputations create progress. But these must be conducted peacefully. Throwing rocks at political opponents is both barbaric and primitive. Violence causes destruction.

Raphael Tuju has declared his candidature for the presidency of this country. It?s his constitutional right. More than eight others have similarly announced their interest in the highest office in the land. They, too, have a fundamental right to canvass for votes in all parts of Kenya. Nobody has the right to cordon off any part of the country from his or her opponents.

When Tuju visited Kisumu last week, he went there to meet the people and give account of himself, his vision and policies. It was his democratic right. He wasn?t armed. He didn?t preach or agitate violence. And he didn?t need permission from anybody to exercise his rights.

Tuju?s entourage and supporters weren?t violent, either. Yet Tuju?s convoy was senselessly attacked, his vehicles damaged and one of his campaign staff injured. The injured lady is a Kenyan. She has the right to go anywhere she likes with whomsoever she chooses. The only reason she was attacked was because she accompanied Tuju to Kisumu. That?s unacceptable.

Granted, politics is a competitive civilian sport. But it?s governed by rules, laws and the Constitution. It?s played within the context of a democratic multi-party environment. The cornerstones of that democratic process are five fundamental rights: freedom of thought, conscience, expression, association and movement. These rights are entrenched, guaranteed and protected by the Constitution. None of these rights can be waived, suspended or breached whimsically by anyone no matter how powerful s/he may be.

Political competition or rivalry isn?t a basis for infringing on anybody?s rights. Tuju is a Kenyan. He has the right of movement and association like anybody else. As such, the hooligans who attacked him and his convoy not only violated his rights; they also subverted the Constitution. But even more egregiously, they attempted to fence-off Kisumu from Tuju. Why? What?s their fear?

Many have speculated on the motives of the unwarranted attack. Some have argued that the hooligans were acting at the behest of a known political party and its leader both of whom are deemed to be dominant in Nyanza. Others have reasoned that the hooligans were aggrieved following disagreement with the Tuju campaign team. We will soon know the truth.

But one seriously wonders why the dominant political formation in Nyanza ? ODM ? has reacted in the most schizophrenic manner. On Sunday, November 6th, the ODM Secretary General Prof. Anyang? Nyong?o issued a statement condemning the attack on Tuju and called for the perpetrators to be arrested and prosecuted to the full extent of the law. That was laudable.

Yet in a characteristic discordant manner now synonymous with the Orange party, three ODM MPs and a few misguided party activists released statements condemning Tuju for allegedly staging the violent attack on himself just a day after Nyong?o?s condemnation.

On Monday November the 6th, the ODM party leader and Prime Minister, Raila Odinga released a tepid prepared statement appealing to ?the citizens of Kenya to observe peace in this election year.? The statement had no sound bite. It was a generic appeal. It didn?t mention the attack on Tuju in Kisumu. Neither did it condemn it. It actually didn?t specifically condemn violence and political hooliganism. Moreover, neither Raila nor the ODM party has appealed directly to their supporters to be tolerant and refrain from all acts of violence.

It wasn?t clear whether Raila was speaking as the ODM leader or as the Prime Minister of Kenya. And although the local media attempted to give the statement a positive spin and claimed that Raila had ?condemned the attack on Tuju?, Raila never uttered Tuju?s name nor did he mention the words Kisumu or political hooliganism. In other words, Raila?s was a pro-forma and generic statement that could have been issued by Lord Evelyn Baring during the state of emergency in Kenya between 1952 and 1959. It was politically useless!

By Tuesday November 8th, the ODM had completely squandered all the credits Prof Nyong?o?s earlier strong condemnation had generated. A statement read at the end of the party?s parliamentary group meeting, which was attended by the PM, his deputy, Musalia Mudavadi and other party leaders, recklessly and completely retracted Prof. Nyong?o?s laudable condemnation. The party claimed, without a scintilla of evidence, that Tuju had staged managed his own stoning and that the perpetrators were transported from outside Nyanza.

This was typical and quintessential ODM: confused, disorganised and hypocritical. It was also a sign of despondency. Kenyans began to question ODM?s real intentions. The contradictory and inconsistent statements exposed ODM?s leadership as dishonest and opportunistic. Instead of an unequivocal condemnation of political hooliganism, the party condemned the victim of the violent attack. In an inexplicable act of schizophrenic contortion, ODM condoned political violence and hooliganism.

Essentially, by its latest statement, ODM leaders achieved what its detractors have failed to do: it voluntarily owned political violence. They did so without the approval of its rank and file. That?s sad. They did so to score cheap political points. That?s not just irresponsible; it is reckless.

ODM is a senior partner in the grand coalition government. Its leadership has a positive duty to be responsible and to encourage all Kenyans ? ODM supporters included ? to be peaceful and law abiding. Multi-party democracy is for all Kenyans and regions, Nyanza included.

We must condemn all acts of violence and hooliganism unreservedly! Kenyans must not allow anybody ? no matter how powerful ? to quibble with or excuse violence. Everybody must be free to visit any part of the country at any given time. The keys to the 47 counties belong to the people; not to carpetbaggers.

Mr. Miguna is a Barrister & Solicitor in Canada. He is also an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya.

Read more: http://jukwaa.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=6113#ixzz1dhH6CouU